In this case, the petitioner Yuvaraj Swami was arrested in Dec. 2020 by Bengaluru Police for allegedly cheating several people of crores of rupees on the pretext of providing them Government job. The petitioner took the ex-judge to meet top political leaders so as to convince him to make the payment to him. The retired High Court Judge gave a bribe of Rs. 8.50 crore to the petitioner through RTGS and cash and the payment was made in 2018-19. Then, after the arrest of the Yuvaraj Swami in Dec. 2020, the retired Judge also filed a complaint of being cheated by him.
Arguments advanced on behalf of the accused
The contention made by the Senior Advocate Tomy Sebastian appearing for the accused that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated by the Police on the complaint filed by him against the Joint Commissioner of Police, CCB to Lokayukta.
The Police have already recovered the amounts received by the petitioner and they have also seized the bank accounts of the petitioner. The charge sheet has already been filed by the Police and in another few cases , the Police will soon file the charge sheet. Therefore, the presence of the petitioner is no more required for the investigation.
He also mentions the case of MOHAMMAD MANSOOR KHAN V. THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT wherein the accused was granted bail having same facts and circumstances with that of Yuvraj’s case.
Prosecution opposed the plea
The arguments advanced by the Special Public Prosecutor V. M. Sheelavant that the petitioner is found to have cheated so many persons by receiving huge money from them on the pretext that he will provide them Government job. The Police have recovered huge cash and filled cheques from the custody of the petitioner.
Also, the petitioner is having high contacts with ministers and bureaucrats and he is yet to disclose the names of the person to whom he has paid the money. Even , Income Tax Department and the Directorate of Enforcement are also verifying the case for taking cognizance of the offences and are not making enquiry to take the custody of the petitioner to further investigate in the case.
The single- bench of Justice K Natarajan held that “Though he has stated in his voluntary statement that he has paid some amounts to the politicians and other persons and assured to provide jobs, but the petitioner seems to be a middleman and highly influential person having contact with Ministers otherwise, it is not possible to promise or assure for providing or securing jobs like Governor, Chairman of Boards and Transport Corporation and also other posts do not arise. He is suppressing the names of the persons to whom he has paid the money for securing the posts.”
He also added “It is also most unfortunate that a former Judge of the High Court has paid bribe to the petitioner for securing the Post of Governor which act of the complainant not only lowered the prestige of a Judge and also affect the image of Governor’s post.”
He concluded by saying “ Such being the case, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitiled for bail in all the petitions.”
Reported by Prerna Singh