<p>“Governor’s sanction to prosecute after satisfying himself that there is a case made out to prosecute the petitioner, and the special court having taken cognisance after recording sworn statement also discussed each and every document. It cannot be said that there is no prima facie against the petitioner. In the circumstances, I do not think this is a fit case for granting of anticipatory bail,” Justice Narayanaswamy said in his order rejecting anticipatory bail.<br /><br />The Court concurred with the prosecution’s submission to reject the bail on the ground that Yeddyurappa may tamper witnesses. Witnesses are large in numbers and all are government servants working in various capacities, including IAS officers. They may not be in position to depose freely. In case anticipatory bail is granted, the court believes that the petitioner could definitely influence the witnesses, the Court noted.<br /><br />Contention rejected<br />Uday U Lalit, senior counsel at the Supreme Court who appeared for Yeddyurappa contended that the denotification of land was a collective decision. <br /><br />The Court however, did not buy the argument. Another petition seeking anticipatory bail in Upper Bhadra Project scam has been posted to September 5.<br /><br />Petition withdrawn<br />The Division Bench comprising Justices K L Manjunath and H S Kempanna dismissed a petition filed by Yeddyurappa seeking quashing of the Lokayukta report. The matter was dismissed as the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.<br /></p>
<p>“Governor’s sanction to prosecute after satisfying himself that there is a case made out to prosecute the petitioner, and the special court having taken cognisance after recording sworn statement also discussed each and every document. It cannot be said that there is no prima facie against the petitioner. In the circumstances, I do not think this is a fit case for granting of anticipatory bail,” Justice Narayanaswamy said in his order rejecting anticipatory bail.<br /><br />The Court concurred with the prosecution’s submission to reject the bail on the ground that Yeddyurappa may tamper witnesses. Witnesses are large in numbers and all are government servants working in various capacities, including IAS officers. They may not be in position to depose freely. In case anticipatory bail is granted, the court believes that the petitioner could definitely influence the witnesses, the Court noted.<br /><br />Contention rejected<br />Uday U Lalit, senior counsel at the Supreme Court who appeared for Yeddyurappa contended that the denotification of land was a collective decision. <br /><br />The Court however, did not buy the argument. Another petition seeking anticipatory bail in Upper Bhadra Project scam has been posted to September 5.<br /><br />Petition withdrawn<br />The Division Bench comprising Justices K L Manjunath and H S Kempanna dismissed a petition filed by Yeddyurappa seeking quashing of the Lokayukta report. The matter was dismissed as the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.<br /></p>
