TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 1422
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to abuse of process of Court. 2. The relevant facts which gave rise to this petition are as under:-- "In the year 2003, Government of Karnataka had formed a Task Force headed by Azim Premji. The Task Force identified 1422 acres of land in four different villages in Bangalore for the purpose of establishment of IT, ITES and Hardware based Industries. The petitioner was one of the founder directors of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited alongwith his sister and brother-in-law. It was a private limited company which had interest in software related activities. In the year 2006, the petitioner was desirous of making a proposal for setting up a hardware park, Special Economic Zone. He made an application for establishing IT based Special Economic Zone on the outskirts of Bangalore under the provisions of Karnataka Industrial Facilitation Act, 2002 in an area of 325 acres of land at Bandi Kodigehalli Village, Bangalore North Taluk with an investment of Rs. 1130 crores with a potential to generate 75,000 jobs. The petitioner submitted the application to the nodal agency i.e., Karnataka Udyog Mitra. As the project investment was more than Rs. 50.00 crores, under the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are Development Pvt. Limited in pursuance of the Memorandum of Understanding between M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited and M/s. United Telecom Limited (UTL) dated 2.5.2007. Consequently, M/s. United Telecom Limited acquired 99% shares in M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited and majority number of board of directors. The Board of Directors of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited took a decision to appoint a Land Aggregator Agency by name M/s. Indu Builders and Developers vide a Tripartite Agreement, whereunder Indu Builders & Developers would carry out the function of land aggregator and facilitate consent of individual land owners and handle negotiations in that regard. Accordingly, the Management Board of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited deposited 118 crores to KIADB in terms of Government Guideline value for acquisition of 325 acres of land in Bandi Kodigehalli village. Said sum has been utilized by KIADB to pay for each land owner whose lands have been acquired. Apart from compensation paid by KIADB, M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited through M/s. Indu Builders & Developers paid additional ex gratia to each individual land ow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... information with respect to M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited. He produced documents which were seized under a mahazar in Cr. No. 42/2010. The Investigation in Cr. No. 42/2010 came to be stayed by this Court in Crl.P. No. 5010/2010. The Lokayukta police continued investigation in Cr. No. 43/2010, regarding alleged irregularities in the matter of acquisition and disbursement of compensation by M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited by summoning the petitioner on 27.10.2010, 28.10.2010, 25.11.2010 and 26.11.2010 under Sections 91 and 160 Cr.P.C. The petitioner appeared before the Lokayukta police on the aforesaid dates and produced the documents sought for and provided all the information. Subsequently, crime No. 43/2010 also came to be stayed in Crl.P. No. 5377/2010. When the matter stood thus, based on the documents and the information furnished by the petitioner in Cr. Nos. 42/2010, 43/2010 and 48/2010 and the revelations allegedly found by the Lokayukta police during the course of investigation in Cr. Nos. 42/2010 and 43/2010, they registered Cr. No. 57/2010 to circumvent the order of stay granted by this Court in which this petitioner came to be arrayed as ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c Prosecutor for respondent Lokayukta Sri. Venkatesh P. Dalwai on the other hand would submit that the Lokayukta Police upon investigation filed charge-sheet against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 8, 12 and 13(1) (a) of P.C. Act and Sections 419, 420, 426, 468, 471 r/w 120(B) IPC. Now the case is posted for hearing before charge and therefore it is proper for the petitioner to address his arguments before framing the charge before the Special Judge. The learned counsel would further submit that the Lokayukta Police have collected sufficient material to establish the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offences, the petition is devoid of merits and hence he sought for dismissal of the petition. 9. The gist of the prosecution case is that accused No. 1 at the relevant point of time was the Minister for Major and Medium Industries, Government of Karnataka. Accused No. 2 is the son of accused No. 1, petitioner/accused No. 3 is a practicing Advocate at Bangalore. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were in real estate business in Bangalore. They used to purchase lands and sell it for higher price. For documentation i.e., to prepare ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. An enquiry was held. On the basis of enquiry report, Cr. No. 42/2010 to Cr. No. 46/2010 came to be registered. During the investigation of Cr. No. 43/2010, this petitioner was summoned under Section 160 Cr.P.C. He gave his statement and produced all the information as sought for. Since the investigation in Cr. No. 43/2010 was stayed by this Court in Cr.P. No. 5377/2010 the Lokayukta police registered another FIR in Cr. No. 57/2010 wherein this petitioner is shown as accused No. 3, Katta Subramanya Naidu as accused No. 1, his son as accused No. 2 and 7 others. Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed in Spl. CC No. 135/2011 on the file of Special Court. The proceedings against this petitioner sought to be quashed on the ground that there can be no second FIR and consequently there can be no fresh investigation on receipt of every subsequent information in respect of offence committed during the course of same transaction. 10. Running through the records and charge-sheet filed in Cr. No. 57/2010, it transpired that in respect of acquisition of land and payment of compensation to the land owners by KIADB for various projects, KIADB officials committed cert....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner were seized. Thereafter, the petitioner was taken to his office and asked to give other files pertaining to M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited company for the purpose of investigation. On 27.10.2010, the petitioner was issued with another notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. in Cr. No. 43/2010 by K.C. Laxminarayana, Police Inspector, Police Wing, City Division, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bangalore calling upon him to be present in his office on 27.10.2010 for interrogation. Again, he was issued with another notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. in Cr. No. 43/2010 to furnish information pertaining to M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited company of the petitioner as sought for in the notice within seven days without fail. The said notice was issued by H.S. Manjunatha, Dy. S.P., Karnataka Lokayukta. Again on 25.11.2010, the petitioner was issued with another two notices by H.S. Manjunatha, Dy. S.P. calling upon him to furnish information sought for in the notices immediately on the same day. On 26.11.2010, he was issued with another notice under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. in Cr. No. 43/2010 calling upon him to come to Lokayukta office before H.S. Manjunatha, Dy. S.P. and cooperat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7. File No. 7- Special Economic Zone file pertaining to M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited. 8. File No. 8- Two Notary registers seized from Jayanna." True copies of following documents were also seized:-- "a. File pertaining to application of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited, Project report, notices and orders obtained from Karnataka Udyog Mitra on 2.11.2010. b. The Auditor's report of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited for the year 2005-2007 given by S. Srinivas, Chartered Accountant dated 22.11.2010. c. Report prepared and given by Mohammed Hidayathulla upon going through the balance sheet of M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited company. d. Letters written by Investigating Officer to various offices and persons in relation to M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited company and the reply received." The statements of following persons were also seized. "a. Anjana Murthy dated 6.10.2010. b. Srinandan dated 6.10.2010. c. S. Jayanna dated 29.10.2010. d. S.V. Srinivas and S.K.V. Chalapathi. e. B.M. Vijayshankar, Senior Managing Director o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pertaining to acquisition of land for M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited of Bandikodeginahalli village. 8. Notes of case worker Dulaiah and Byregowda upon inspection of file. 9. True copies of Volumes 1 to 8 pertaining to file 1583 obtained from the office of KIADB." All these documents were seized by Krishnamurthy, Police Inspector, who was investigating Cr. No. 46/2010 and were transferred to Cr. No. 57/2010 under a mahazar. 15. Thus whatever investigation said to have been done in Cr. No. 57/2010 is nothing but transfer of material collected during investigation of Cr. Nos. 42/2010, 43/2010 and 46/2010 for the same offences. All these documents that were seized in the aforesaid crimes have been transferred to this crime by drawing a panchanama and they were subjected to P.F. in Cr. No. 57/2010. Nothing more is brought on record during the course of investigation of Cr. No. 57/2010. 16. The Investigating Officer filed charge-sheet against 10 accused persons including the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No. 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 8, 12, 13(1) (d) r/w 13(2) of P.C. Act and Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 r/w 120-B IPC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt Pvt. Limited without obtaining consent letter from the owners of the lands and without deposit of amount by M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited. For the purpose of obtaining consent letters from the land owners of the land to be acquired for M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited, M/s. Indu Builders & Developers a benami partnership firm has been created by accused No. 2, 4 and 5. Accused Nos. 6 and 3 transferred 87 crores to the account of M/s. Indu Builders & Developers as bribe amount to accused Nos. 1 and 2 for having shown favour". 18. The petitioner has sought to quash FIR in Cr. No. 57/2010 of Lokayukta police station, Bangalore City and the proceedings arising out of the said crime in Spl. C.C. No. 135/2011 on the file of Special Court, on the ground that there can be no second FIR or multiple FIRs in the case of offences relating to same transactions. It is impermissible and consequently there can be no fresh investigation on receipt of subsequent information in respect of the same cognizable offence or same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more cognizable offences. If we look at the FIR in Cr. Nos. 42/2010, 43/2010, 46/2010 and 57/2010, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me to fresh investigation by the police in respect of same incident giving rise to one or more cognizable offences. The FIR in Cr. No. 57/2010 does not satisfy the requirement of Section 154 Cr.P.C. 20. Registration of second FIR is permissible only if the offences disclosed in the second FIR are not part of the first FIR as held by the Supreme court in (2013) 6 SCC 384 in the case of Anju Chaudhary v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another. I have perused the FIR in Cr. Nos. 42/2010, 43/2010, 46/2010 and 57/2010 and compared. The place of occurrence in all FIR is same, conspiracy is same, narration of events are same. Except registration of FIR in Cr. No. 57/2010, no further investigation is done and the charge-sheet has been filed by just transferring the documents seized and statement of the witnesses recorded in Cr. Nos. 42/2010, 43/2010 and 46/2010 in Cr. No. 57/2010. 21. The decision relied upon by the petitioner reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181 in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and others and the decisions reported in (2013) 6 SCC 348 in the case of Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another are rightly applicable to the facts of this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ode, 1973 - Ss.154 to 162, 173(8), 173(2), 169, 170 and 482 - FIR, initial investigation, further investigation, first charge-sheet, subsequent/supplementary charge-sheet(s) and second FIR - Scheme of Cr.P.C., explained -Duty of IO to investigate connected offences committed in course of same transaction - Held, there can be no second FIR and, consequently, there can be no fresh investigation on receipt of every subsequent information in respect of the same cognizable offence or the same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more cognizable offences - Rather, investigating agency may investigate further upon receipt of subsequent information, normally with the leave of Magistrate/court and where during further investigation, investigating agency collects further evidence, oral or documentary, it is obliged to forward the same with one or more supplementary reports/charge-sheets to court." 24. From the ratio laid down in the above decisions of the Apex Court, it is manifest that the registration of second FIR or multiple FIRs in respect of offences committed in the same transactions is impermissible. Considering the scheme of Cr.P.C., fundamental rights of the accused guar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted was placed before the State High Level Clearance Committee by Karnataka Udyog Mitra headed by Chief Minister in the meeting of the committee and the application was approved. M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited was permitted to start Special Economic Zone in an area of 325 acres of land in Bandi kodigehalli village. The amount to be paid to the land owners was deposited by United Telecom Limited. The land was to be acquired by SLAO, KIADB - a Government agency. It is not the case of the Lokayukta that the amount required for payment of compensation was not deposited by M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited and UTL. M/s. Itasca did not gain anything. The amount for payment of ex gratia to the land owners was deposited by M/s. ITASCA Software Development Pvt. Limited into account of M/s. Indu Builders and Developers, which was entrusted with the work of negotiating with the land owners and to obtain the consent letters from the owners to pass the consent award. The case of the Lokayukta is that the amount deposited with M/s. Indu Builders and Developers to make ex gratia payment has been misused by accused Nos. 1 and 2, since M/s. Indu Builders and Developers is....