IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.1434/2019 Between:
D.K.Abbas, S/o.D.K.Mohammed, Aged about 57 years, R/at Kanthadka House, Alike Village and Post, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannda District-575 006. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Subramanya.H.V, Advocate) And:
State by Vittal Police Station, Bantwala, Reptd. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Smt.Namitha Mahesh.B.G, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed u/s.439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.302/2018 of Vitla P.S., D.K., District for the offence p/u/ss 419,420, 465,423,466,467,468,471,474 r/w 34 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following;
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking to release him on bail in Crime No.302/2018 of Vittal Police Station,Bantwal for the offence punishable under Sections.419, 420, 423, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474 r/w with 34 of IPC.
2. The zist of the complaint is that complainant’s mother had got 0.92 acre of land in Survey No.63/1A2P1, bearing Khata No.504 of Alike Village. Her mother died leaving behind 8 children. It is further alleged that when they recently tried to get the Khata mutated, they came to know that the said property has been pledged with Vitla Grameena Co-operative Bank for a sum of Rs.30,00,000/-. They made enquiry with the Bank authorities and stated that their mother died on 12/01/2007. After coming to know the said fact, accused No.2 tried to avoid the complainant by not giving necessary information. They got issued legal notice to accused No.2 on 12/10/2018 inturn, accused No.2 replied to the said notice on 26/10/2018 stating that accused No.1 had borrowed loan in the year 2012 by pledging the said property on the basis of power of attorney executed by their mother dated 02/05/2013. It is further alleged that accused No.1 by creating power of attorney of a dead person had pledged the said property, borrowed the loan of Rs.30,00,000/- and cheated the complainant as well as the bank. On the basis of complaint, a case has been registered.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that complainant is the sister of the petitioner and there are some property disputes between the parties and as such, a false complaint has been registered. He further submitted that the deceased had executed power of attorney in favour of the petitioner, on the basis of which, he pledged the said property and borrowed loan of Rs.30,00,000/-. He further submitted that there was no lawful gain or loss has been caused to any other person. He also submitted that in the said survey number, mother of the petitioner/accused was also having a share and as such, he has pledged the said property and has got the loan. He further submitted that the alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He submitted that petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by the court and also to furnish surety. Hence, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent- State submitted that the petitioner is the step son. She further submitted that though the deceased died on 12/01/2007, he got prepared a General Power of Attorney which was executed on 02/05/2013 by the mother of the complainant. She further submitted that the material documents produced during the course of investigation clearly goes to show that the petitioner/accused by impersonation, with an intention to cheat the complainant and others had created or concocted such documents. She further submitted that one more case has been registered under the similar facts and circumstances against the petitioner/accused and if the petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and he may not be available for trial.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. On a close reading of the contents of the complaint and the submissions made by the parties, the relationship between the parties is not in dispute. It is the contention of the complainant that by creating a false General Power of Attorney that the petitioner/accused pledged the said property and borrowed a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- from the bank. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of General Power of Attorney executed by the mother of the complainant, petitioner had pledged the property, as his mother is also having a share in the said property. That matter has to be ascertained only after trial. The alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Investigation has already been completed and custodial detention is not necessary. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, by imposing stringent conditions, if the petitioner is released on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In view of the above discussion, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail in Cr.No.No.302/2018 of Vittal Police Station, Bantwal for the offence punishable under Sections.419, 420, 423, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions;
1. He shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e. on every 1st between 10 a.m. to 5.00 p.m.
before the jurisdictional police till the trial is concluded.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. He shall regularly appear before the Court for trial.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE Msu