This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.9

under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for granting bail in Crime

No.180/2022 registered by the Ulsoor gate police station,

Bengalore, now pending in S.C.No.1916/2022, on the file

of the LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at

Bengaluru, filed charge sheet for the offence punishable

under Sections 255, 258, 259, 260, 465, 468, 473, 420

read with 34 of IPC.

2.

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for

the respondent-State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on the suo-

motu complaint registered by the Ulsoor gate police on

19.7.2022 alleging that as per their information some fake

e-stamps were being sold in the Kandaya Bhavana

Bangalore. Hence they set up a D-kayath Customer, who

contacted one Karthik, accused No.2 for stamp paper then

he introduced to the accused No.1. Accordingly, the police

paid money for obtaining fake e-stamp papers by paying

3

Rs.10,000/- as advance amount. On the same day, the

accused Nos.3 and 4 brought the stamp papers and the

police trapped them. The accused Nos.1 to 4 were

arrested on the voluntary statement and this petitioner was

also arrested on 01.08.2022. He was remanded to judicial

custody, where his earlier bail petition came to be rejected

in Crl.P.No.10486/2022 dated 5.12.2022, hence once again

he is before this court.

4. The learned counsel for petitioner has contended

that the petitioner is aged more than 71 years and only

one old stamp paper was recovered from him, on the

ground that it was sold by accused No.7 and it was

purchased in the name of one Pramila, the said Pramila is

not examined. Absolutely there is no material against this

petitioner for printing and circulating the e-stamp paper,

The petitioner is in custody for almost one year, hence

prayed for granting bail.

5. Per contra learned HCGP objected the petition and

contended that he is a habitual offender and one more case

is registered against him at Bangarpet police station. He is

4

involved in the purchasing of bogus e-stamp paper.

Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.

6. Having heard the arguments and on perused of

the records, which reveals, this petitioner name was

implicated on the voluntary statement of accused No.7 and

the said accused No.7 said to have purchased paper from

accused Nos.1 to 4 and sold to this petitioner and only one

paper was seized from him which was pertaining to 2009

i.e., in the name of one Pramila. The police have not

examined the said Pramila as a witness and it is not the

case, where this petitioner either created the fake stamp

paper or was selling it to the other persons, but he has

purchased a stamp paper from accused No.7 and the said

accused No.7 also having stall and he was the one who

purchased from the accused No.1. Though one more case

is pending against him the learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that he is friend of the accused No.7

and acquainted with accused No.7, therefore, he has been

partially implicated in both cases. On considering the

same, the allegation is only that he has purchased the e-

5

stamp paper from accused No.7 and implicated on

voluntary statement of accused No.7 now investigation is

completed, charge sheet is filed. The petitioner is in

custody for almost one year. Also, he is aged about more

than 71 years and now the case is committed to the court

of sessions and pending for trial. Therefore, considering

the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping this

petitioner in judicial custody will not serve any purpose.

The averments against this petitioner is lighter than the

allegation

against

other

accused

persons.

The

apprehension of the prosecution may be safeguarded by

imposing certain condition. Therefore, by imposing certain

stringent conditions, if bail is granted to the petitioner, no

prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution.

Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed.

The trial court