The High Court has issued several guidelines to the registry and district courts to evolve a mechanism to verify applications filed for regular/anticipatory bail to curb the practice of fraud in the courts.
Justice HP Sandesh passed these directions while imposing Rs one lakh cost on a petitioner for suppressing the fact that he had filed bail applications before the Sessions Courts in Tumakuru and Mysuru.
In the case on hand, the petitioner was accused in the FIR registered by the Chikkajala Police near Devanahalli in a case of fraud involving land. The petitioner was allegedly involved in the creation of documents to usurp certain lands in Yelahanka and transacted using fictitious persons. When a jurisdictional court at Devanahalli rejected his anticipatory bail application, the petitioner moved to the high court and subsequently withdrew the petition on January 19, 2022.
Even as the petition before the High Court was pending, he moved applications before sessions courts in Tumakuru and Mysuru seeking similar relief. He had moved the high court with a second anticipatory bail petition concealing all these details.
Justice Sandesh directed the Registrar General to file a complaint before the jurisdictional police (Vidhana Soudha police) to investigate the matter. The Director-General of Police has been directed to change the Investigating Officer immediately who has not taken any steps when a serious offence of impersonation, fraud and forgery is alleged against the petitioner.
The guidelines issued by the court stipulate the Director of Prosecution to instruct the Public Prosecutors to supply the necessary information to the concerned court regarding pendency or the decision of the earlier bail applications of the accused in the same offence after taking information from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police officer.
A direction has been issued to the registry and district courts to insist on Vakalat when a bail petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail, since the accused will not be in custody in such cases, in order to avoid fraud on the court. The court said that this guideline in case the petitioner denies the very instruction given to the counsel and also safer on the advocates appearing.
A further direction has been issued to the registry to issue a circular to identify the number of petitions being filed and to ensure that the first petition is maintainable and subsequent petitions are not maintainable to avoid bench hunting/bench hopping/bench avoiding.
Watch the latest DH Videos here: