Yeddyurappa`s bail applications adjourned to Nov 2
Karnataka HC adjourned to November 2 the bail applications filed by Yeddyurappa, remanded to judicial custody, in corruption cases against him.
Bangalore: Karnataka High Court on Monday
adjourned to November 2 the bail applications filed by former
Chief Minister BS Yeddyurappa, remanded to judicial custody,
in corruption cases against him.
Justice BV Pinto adjourned to November 2 for further
hearing the bail applications moved by Yeddyurappa in the two
land de-notification cases in which he has been remanded to
judicial custody till November 3.
The cases have been registered by Lokayukta police on
private complaints by city advocate Sirijan Basha alleging
that Yeddyurappa had de-notified governments lands for the
benefit of his family members.
Yeddyurappa, has moved the high court for bail after
Special Lokayukta Judge NK Sudhindra Rao rejected his plea
for the relief.
Opposing bail, senior counsel for the complainant CH
Hanumantharaya charged Yeddyurappa with "misusing his
position, abusing his office" by "ignoring and bypassing" the
de-notification committee to get a report which was "desirable
and palatable to him".
He submitted the trial court had considered everything,
scrutinised all records scrupulously before rejecting the bail
application of the petitioner and remanding him.
"It (remand) was not an act done cursorily. It was
consistently held by the trial court that a prima facie case
was made out (against Yeddyurappa)", he stated.
Referring to the point raised by the petitioner`s counsel
that government lands were denotified by an earlier Chief
Minister (HD Kumaraswamy) also, Hanumantharaya submitted "one
illegality cannot be the licence for another illegality".
"The very abuse of his status, position, standing in the
society to get something done for somebody, satisfies section
13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and constitutes an
offence", he submitted.
Quoting a Supreme Court order for refusing bail in
corruption cases, Hanumatharaya said "there is greater danger
of elimination of evidence through money power" in such cases.
He further submitted that in case bail was granted to the
petitioner nobody would become an approver.