The Karnataka High Court has granted regular bail to an advocate accused of demanding money from a litigant on the pretext of bribing a sitting judge to secure bail for the litigant's son. Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde passed the order while hearing a criminal petition filed by the advocate seeking release from custody.
What offences were alleged against the advocate?
The case was registered at the Vidhana Soudha Police Station, Bengaluru, under Sections 318(4) (cheating), 79 (insulting the modesty of a woman), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The complainant alleged that the advocate demanded money claiming it was required to secure bail for the complainant's son through a sitting judge.
The court recorded that the advocate demanded an amount in the name of the judge to secure a bail order. It was further alleged that Rs 72,000 had been collected and a demand for Rs 1 lakh was made, stating that the amount was demanded by the judge. The court observed that if the alleged incident had taken place, it constitutes one of the most unfortunate events, amounting to the highest form of professional misconduct on the part of the advocate, tarnishing the name of the judge as well as the institution.
Parity with Co-Accused and Investigation Status
The petitioner contended that the two other accused in the case had already been granted bail. The court noted that those accused were released on bail after the charge sheet was filed against them. In the present case, the investigation was not complete as against the petitioner. The Additional State Public Prosecutor submitted that the call details of the petitioner had been secured and the investigation was ongoing. The court also noted that telephonic conversations between the petitioner and the victim had been recorded.
Aspect | Co-Accused (Two Others) | Petitioner (Advocate) |
|---|---|---|
Bail Status | Granted regular bail | Sought regular bail |
Stage of Proceedings | After charge sheet filed | Investigation incomplete |
Evidence Secured | Not specified | Call details and recorded conversations secured |
Court's Reasoning on Bail Entitlement
Justice Hegde observed that there was no dispute that the maximum punishment for the alleged offences is seven years' imprisonment and fine. It was also undisputed that the petitioner is not accused of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and that there are no other criminal antecedents against the petitioner. The court held that since the investigating agency has secured the call details and recorded conversations, the petitioner's further retention in custody may not be required.
The court stated that the settled position of law governing bail would come to the aid of the petitioner. Despite the grave nature of the allegations, the court concluded that the petition has to be allowed and the petitioner is required to be released on bail. The High Court allowed the criminal petition and directed the release of the accused-advocate upon executing a personal bond of Rs three lakh.
Does the gravity of professional misconduct allegations override statutory bail considerations?
No. The court held that despite the serious allegations amounting to the highest form of professional misconduct and tarnishing the judiciary's reputation, the settled legal principles governing bail, the maximum seven-year sentence, absence of capital or life imprisonment charges, clean antecedents, and completion of evidence collection necessitate the grant of bail.