JUDGMENT

Maheshan Nagaprasanna, J. - Petitioner/accused No. 11 in Special Case No. 318 of 2020 is before this Court calling in question entire proceedings registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 13(1)(c)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('the Act' for short) in Crime No. 24 of 2019 against all the accused.

2. Heard Sri Ashwin Vaish, learned counsel for Sri Gautam S. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.N. Manmohan, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-

On 10-04-2003 one N. Muniraju and N. Srinivas became owners of property in Sy. No. 9 measuring 8.08 guntas of Kowdenahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk and revenue records and other necessary ownership details also claimed to be standing in the name of the said persons. On 18.01.2005 amended Section 14B of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act permitted Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike ('BBMP' for short) to grant Transferable Development Rights (TDR') certificate against voluntary surrender of land by a citizen for public purpose.

4. On 20-12-2014 a General Power of Attorney ('GPA' for short) was executed by the aforesaid owners of land measuring 7114.76 sq.mts. in favour of one Sri B.S. Surendranath. The purpose of GPA being executed was for the purpose of execution of relinquishment deed in favour of BBMP to obtain Development Rights Certificate ('DRC for short) from the BBMP and sell the TDR to prospective buyers. On 20-01-2014, in furtherance thereof, the owners also executed an agreement to sell in favour of one Suresh K and Gautham K who were confirming parties to the GPA executed as afore-quoted.

5. On 10-03-2014 the GPA holders execute a relinquishment deed qua 301 sq.mts. in favour of the BBMP to secure TDR against surrendered property for public purpose. On 1-04-2014, TDR is issued by the BBMP to the said aforesaid owners in terms of DRC in lieu of surrendering of the properties. On 16-05-2014 a deed of transfer of development is executed by the owners in favour of M/s. Sri Nakoda Constructions Limited, whose Director is the petitioner. Therefore, TDR was issued by the BBMP in favour of the petitioner. On 11.04.2019 a complaint is registered against several officers of the BBMP which becomes a crime in Crime No. 13 of 2019 alleging offences punishable under Section 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of the Act and Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120B of the IPC in respect of Sy. No. 132 of Kowdenahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. This FIR did not concern the petitioner.

6. On 23-07-2019 a second FIR is registered in Crime No. 24 of 2019 by the Anti Corruption Bureau which pertained to Sy. No. 9 of Kowdenahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk which land concerns the present petition. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. Police, after investigation, file a charge sheet in Crime No. 24 of 2019 on 15-06-2020 against 11 accused. It is here the name of the petitioner figures as accused No. 11. On filing of the charge sheet, the learned Sessions Judge takes cognizance for the offences punishable under the Act and the IPC as afore-quoted. It is at that juncture, the petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court in the subject petition.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently argue and contend that the petitioner is no way concerned with the entire transaction as he is only a Director of the Company - M/s. Sri Nakoda Construction Limited and is not the recipient of any TDR rights in the entire process. He has been wrongly shown as a TDR agent. The learned counsel would strenuously contend that the order taking cognizance suffers from want of application of mind as the order taking cognizance is vague and bald. He would place reliance upon the judgments of