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. 6616 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. Manjunath R S/o. Rajappa, Aged about 45 years, Residing at No.139, Panathur, 2nd Stage, Panathur, Bengaluru – 560 103.
2. Sri Venkatesh S/o. Krishna Iyer, Aged about 40 years, R/at No.127, Nisarga, Kadubisanahalli, Panathur, Bengaluru – 560 103. ...Petitioners (By Sri. A.N. Radhakrishna, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka By HAL Police, Bengaluru, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru- 560 001.
(By Sri. M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) ...Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.204/2017 of HAL Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 406, 471, 468, 408, 420 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.204/2017 of H.A.L. Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Sections 418, 406, 471, 468, 408, 420 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The complainant filed a private complaint alleging that she is the owner of the property bearing Sy.No.77/5 and 95/1 at Panathur village and she has been in actual possession and enjoyment of the said property. It is further alleged that the accused No.1 is the grand-son of the complainant and accused No.2 is the friend of accused No.1 and accused No.3 is the Chief Manager of Axis Bank. Accused Nos.1 and 2 got registered the power of attorney by the complainant and other co-owners without informing the status of the documents and without paying any consideration amount to the complainant, on the strength of the GPA, the accused No.1 sold a portion of the property of the complainant without consent for a sum of Rs.4,50,00,000/- and the said amount has also been credited to the account of accused No.1. It is further alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 by taking the advantage of the old age of the complainant they have concocted and created the documents and transferred the said property. On the basis of the complaint, a case was registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the civil disputes are pending between the parties and a counter complaint has also been registered as against the complainant in Crime No.37/2014 before the Halasurugate Police Station. He further submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 have received the GPA and they have sold the said property for a proper consideration with the consent of the complainant and they have also paid an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- on 28.12.2011 through D.D.367988 drawn on Axis Bank and another sum of Rs.50,00,000/- on 31.12.2012 through cheque No.072619. Though the said amount has been received by the complainant, falsely it is contended that no amount has been paid, that itself falsify the case of the complainant. He further submitted that the story narrated by the complainant is not a real fact. It is only with an intention to harass and grab the property, a false complaint has been registered. He further submitted that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are ready to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 2 have concocted and created the documents and have sold the property. He further submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 were absconding and they were not available for investigation or interrogation, if they are enlarged on bail they may not be available for trial. On these grounds he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and other materials which has been produced and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. It is not in dispute that the civil suit is also filed in respect of the same property. It is also not in dispute that a criminal case has been registered in Crime No.37/2014 of Halasurugate Police Station, Bengaluru. It is the specific contention of the petitioners-accused No.1 and 2 that on the basis of the GPA they have sold the property and an amount of Rs.58,00,000/- has been paid to the complainant through demand draft and cheque, a false complaint has been registered, whether the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 have concocted and created the documents, it is a matter which has to be appreciated at the time of trial. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
8. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that if by imposing some stringent conditions, the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 2 are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
9. In the light of the discussion held by me above, petition is allowed and the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.204/2017 of H.A.L. Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 406, 471, 468, 408, 420 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Each of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 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 Investigating Officer.
2. They shall surrender before the Investigation Agency within 15 days from today.
3. They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
4. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
5. They shall mark their attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the charge sheet is filed.
6. They must be available for investigation or interrogation.
Sd/- JUDGE KPS