SUJATA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeks to grant her anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 9/14 of Lokayuktha Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(c)(d) r/w. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the FIR, order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting her bail petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and the order dated 26.9.2014 passed in FIR 41/14 (Crime No. 9/14) granting bail in favour of co -accused.

(3.) SRI . Kumman, learned counsel appearing for the police, submits petitioner is mainly responsible for the misappropriation of funds belonging to the Panchayath, she is the main accused and therefore, if she is granted anticipatory bail, she has got every chances of manipulating the records and she may not appear not appear before the police. Further, if she is granted anticipatory bail she would not cooperate with the respondent for investigating the crime and therefore her request for anticipatory bail may be rejected.