1
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
KABC010233472023
IN THE COURT OF THE LXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-70)
Dated this the 25th day of September, 2023
PRESENT;
Sri. Balagopalakrishna,
c/c of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions
Judge, City Civil Court, (CCH 70).
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
Petitioner:
Sri C.K.Nagaraj
s/o Sri Kencha Boyi,
aged about 58 years,
r/at No. 212, Vinith Estate,
Harohalli hobli,
Kadujakkasandra village,
Gottigehalli, Ramanagara,
Pin code : 562 112
(By B.R.K.Law Offices)
Respondent :
-V/SState of Karnataka by
Kengeri police station,
Bengaluru.
(Represented by Public Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED
U/SEC. 438 OF CR.P.C.
This petition is filed by the petitioner u/sec. 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to grant anticipatory bail
to him in the
2
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
event of his arrest by the respondent police in Cr. No.
375/2023 of Kengeri P.S. for the offence punishable u/sec.
427, 143, 147, 148, 149, 448, 291, 353 of IPC and Sec. 2 of
Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981.
2. It is stated in the petition that the respondent police
have registered Cr. No. 375/2023 against the petitioner
alleging the offence punishable
427, 143, 147, 148, 149,
448, 291, 353 of IPC and Sec. 2 of Prevention of Destruction
and Loss of Property Act, 1981 on the basis of the
information given by one Shivasiddaiah.S, ASI of Kengeri
P.S., It is further stated in the petition that the petitioner is
innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged
by the police. he has been falsely implicated with malafide
intention. The respondent police are making hectic efforts to
arrest the petitioner. The petitioner has
got reasonable
apprehension of his arrest by the respondent police. The
petitioner is the permanent resident of address mentioned
in the cause title and he is coming from respectable family
and he has
no bad antecedents
or previously convicted
and there is no case pending against him. The petitioner is
ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions that may
3
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
be imposed by the court for her enlargement on bail. The
petitioner is ready and willing to offer surety to the
satisfaction of the court. Hence prayed to allow the petition.
3. The learned Prosecutor has filed objections to the
petition
alongwith
report
by
opposing
the
grant
of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the
offence alleged to have been committed by the are grave in
nature and against Society.

It is further stated that the
petitioner is absconding from the date of registering case. If
the petitioner is
enlarged on bail he may commit similar
offence in future. It is further stated that if the petitioner is
enlarged on bail it would be difficult to secure his presence
for trial. With all these grounds amongst others learned PP
has prayed to reject the petition filed by the petitioner.
4. Heard the arguments of
learned P.P. and also
counsel for the petitioner. Perused the petition, objection
and other material on record.
5. The following
points
would arise for my
consideration are as under:
1. Whether the petitioner has made out
grounds to grant anticipatory bail
u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C.?

4
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
2. What order?
6. On the basis of the evidence available on record my
finding on the above points are as under:
i. Point No.1:
ii. Point No.2:
In the affirmative.
As per final order on the following
REASONS
7. The petitioner has filed present petition praying to
grant anticipatory bail to him in Cr. No. 375/2023 of
Wilson garden police for the offences punishable u/sec.
427, 143, 147, 148, 149, 448, 291, 353 of IPC and Sec. 2 of
Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981.
The said crime was registered by the police on the basis of
the information given by
Shivasiddaiah.S, ASI of Kengeri
P.S. The petitioner has produced the certified copy of the
FIR, complaint and other documents. As per the FIR it is
alleged that when the complainant and another P.C were on
patrolling duty receiving credible information that some
nuisance is going on near House No. 342, 5 th main, 2nd cross
and as such they went near the spot and about 2 days back
the Court Commissioner appointed by the court had got
vacated the accused No.2 and 3 from the house and handed
5
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
over the possession of the property to M/s Tumakuru
Veerashaiva Cooperative Bank Ltd. Thereafter
inspite of
court order when the accused tresspassed into the schedule
property there was a case registered in Cr. NO. 374/2023
for the offence punishable u/sec. 448, 341, 504, 506 r/w 34
of IPC. The accused alongwith 15 persons formed unlawful
assembly and beating the gate and damaging the same.
When the complainant directed the accused not to commit
any offence
at the schedule property and set the things
right by approaching the Court. Thereafter the accused
pushed the complainant ASI aside and directed the
complainant to go away from the spot and threatened the
complainant ASI who was on the duty.

The accused
committed law and order problem near the house. The
accused No.2 and 3 had already trespassed into the
schedule property and they are instigating the accused No.1
to
commit tresspass. Accordingly the complaint is lodge.

However the petitioner has denied the said allegations. He
submits there is original suit in OS No. 1439/2023 is
pending seeking the relief of permanent injunction before
the Prl. Senior Civil Judge. The temporary injunction order
6
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
is also passed. Inspite of injunction order the respondent
inspite of having all the knowledge about the injunction
order operating on the schedule property interfered the
possession of the petitioner.

The respondent police
blatantly violated the order passed by the court. There is no
order from the Magistrate to respondent police to break
open the gate or main door to dispossess the accused from
the house.
8. Since FIR is registered against the petitioner by
alleging the commission of non bailable offence and since
the complaint is filed against
him by alleging the
commission of non bailable offence, the petitioner has filed
the present petition apprehending his arrest by the
respondent police. It is the apprehension of the petitioner
that the respondent police after registering the case against
him are making hectic efforts to arrest him and he has got
apprehension of arrest since the respondent police have
registered the FIR by alleging the non bailable offence, there
is possibility of arrest of the petitioner by the respondent
police during the course of investigation. The offences
alleged against the petitioner is not
exclusively punishable
7
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
with death or imprisonment for life. The alleged offences are
triable by the learned Magistrate. The contents of the FIR
has to be adjudicated only after full fledged
trial. Custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is not required for further
investigation of the alleged offence because the role of the
complainant is depending on the documentary evidence.
Further petitioner is residing within the jurisdiction of the
Magistrate. The petitioner is also ready to abide by terms
and conditions imposed by the court for his enlargement
on bail. The petitioner is ready to furnish surety to the
satisfaction of the court for her appearance before the I.O.
she is also ready to cooperate with the investigation of the
case. As such there is no chance of the petitioner
absconding or fleeing away from justice.

The presence of
the petitioner during investigation of the case can be
secured by imposing suitable
terms and conditions. The
apprehension of the learned PP or IO can be meet out by
imposing some conditions. Under the above facts and
circumstances of the case I am of the opinion that the
petition filed by the petitioner is deserves to be allowed and
petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail by imposing
8
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
suitable conditions. Accordingly this Point No.1 is in the
affirmative.
9. Point No.2: By considering the above over all
reasons this court proceed to pass the following;
ORDER
Bail petition filed u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. by the
Petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest, the
respondent police are directed to release the petitioner
in connection with case in
Cr. No. 375/2023 of
respondent police station that registered
for the
offence punishable u/sec. u/sec. 427, 143, 147, 148,
149, 448, 291, 353 of IPC and Sec. 2 of Prevention of
Destruction
and Loss of Property Act, 1981
on
executing personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one
surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial
court , subject to the following conditions.
1. The petitioner shall appear before the IO
within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order.
2. He shall not threaten the Prosecution
witnesses directly or indirectly.
3. The petitioner shall cooperate for
investigation.
4. The petitioner shall not indulge in any other
offence.
5. The petitioner shall furnish his correct
address proof before the trial court.
(Dictated to the JW, transcript thereof is corrected, signed
and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 25 th
day of September, 2023)
(Balagopala Krishna)
c/c of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
9
Crl.Misc.No.8459/2023
Bangalore.