IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF MARCH 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10274/ 2011 BETWEEN: Smt. Jyothamma W/o. Hanumanthappa Age: 25 years, 0cc: Agril Labour and President, Grama Panchayat Karur Tq: Siraguppa, Dist. Bellary R/o. Byrapur village Tq: Siraguppa, Dist. Bellary PETITIONER (By Sri. S. S. Yadrami, Adv.) AND: The State of Karnataka By Sirigere Police of Siraguppa Taluk Rep. by the State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench, Dharwad RESPONDENT (By Sri. Anand Kumar Navalgimath, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C. SEEKING TO DIRECTING SIRIGERE POLICE (DIST. BELLARY) TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARREST IN THEIR P.S. CRIME NO.06/2011 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 406, 408, 320 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard the petitioner’s Counsel and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State in respect of anticipatory bail sought by the petitioner, who is one of the accused persons, against whom a case is registered in Crime No.06/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 420 R/w 34 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in short is that a complaint was filed by the Executive Officer of Taluk Panchavat, Siraguppa alleging that the President Secretary and Bill Collector of the Gram Panchavat Kerur, misappropriated Rs.8,48,000/- under MGNREGA scheme and cheques were issued to K. Sunkanna, H. Mudiyappa and Jayaramashetti, which were encashed and according to the complaint, the payment was made in violation of the rules. 3. The submission made by the petitioner’s Counsel is that the petitioner is a woman and innocent and is not aware of the aforesaid complaint allegations and therefore, she be given anticipatory bail. 4. Submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State is that, this Court has also rejected the anticipatory bail application of Bill Collector Nagaraj, whereas this petitioner is said to have signed the cheques in question and therefore, she cannot be granted anticipatory bail. 4 5. Having thus heard both sides, grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture for above reasons is not warranted. The petitioner is at liberty to move the trial Court for regular bail and in the event of his making application for grant of regular bail, the trial Court shall consider the same preferably on the same day. Sd! JUDGE ab