The LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge in Bengaluru has granted anticipatory bail to four individuals accused of involvement in a high-stakes real estate fraud case involving the alleged sale of Bangalore Development Authority BDA sites. The court presided over by Sri B.G. Pramoda issued the order in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 6000/2022 providing legal relief to Sri Hanumantharaju Sri Krishnamurthy Sri Puttamarappa and Sri Paramesha.

The case originated from a complaint filed by an individual named Ramu A.C. at the Konanakunte Police Station. According to the First Information Report FIR filed under Crime No. 168/2022 the accused were implicated in a complex scheme involving criminal conspiracy and cheating. The petitioners who were designated as Accused No. 11 to 14 were alleged to have acted as intermediaries or brokers in a transaction that resulted in a significant financial loss for the informant.

Details of the Alleged Fraud

The prosecution’s case rests on the allegation that in 2019 the petitioners approached the informant and represented that several other accused individuals Accused No. 1 to 7 and 15 were in possession of sites granted to them by the BDA. They reportedly persuaded the informant to purchase these properties. Relying on these representations the informant entered into an agreement and allegedly paid an advance sale consideration of 54,50,000 Rupees on various dates.

Further allegations suggest that in September 2022 the accused informed the complainant that four specific sites had been officially allotted and induced him to pay an additional 75,64,600 Rupees toward allotment letters and administrative fees. Despite these payments the informant claimed that the sites were never transferred to him and the money was never returned leading to the filing of a criminal case under Sections 120B criminal conspiracy 420 cheating and 417 punishment for cheating read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Defense Arguments and Court Observations

Representing the petitioners Advocate Balachandra T argued that his clients were innocent and had been falsely implicated in the crime. The defense highlighted that the primary allegations regarding the receipt of money were directed at Accused No. 1 to 7 and 15. The petitioners Hanumantharaju Krishnamurthy Puttamarappa and Paramesha were essentially accused of being brokers who introduced the parties but did not personally receive the allegedly defrauded funds.

The defense further emphasized that the petitioners are permanent residents of Bengaluru and the sole breadwinners for their families. They expressed a willingness to cooperate fully with the investigating authorities and abide by any conditions imposed by the court.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application arguing that the offences were grave and detrimental to society. The prosecution expressed concerns that if released the petitioners might abscond tamper with evidence or threaten witnesses.

The Court’s Verdict

After examining the materials on record the court noted that the allegations against the petitioners primarily involved acting as facilitators rather than the direct recipients of the money. Judge B.G. Pramoda observed that the investigation would largely depend on documentary evidence and that custodial interrogation of these specific petitioners was not necessary for the progress of the case.

The court also cited the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the Arnesh Kumar case regarding the necessity of avoiding unnecessary arrests. Since the offences are triable by a Magistrate and not punishable by death or life imprisonment the court found it fit to grant anticipatory bail.

Conditions of Release

The court allowed the petition and directed that in the event of their arrest the petitioners must be released on bail subject to executing a personal bond of 1,00,000 Rupees each with one surety of a like sum. The court imposed several strict conditions to ensure the integrity of the investigation:

1. The petitioners must appear before the Investigating Officer within three weeks and provide all necessary documents.
2. They must cooperate with the investigation and appear whenever summoned.
3. They are prohibited from threatening or inducing any witnesses associated with the case.
4. They must not commit similar offences in the future.
5. They must not leave the country without prior permission from the court.
6. Any violation of these conditions will lead to the cancellation of the bail.

This order provides a significant procedural reprieve for Hanumantharaju and his co-petitioners as the legal proceedings continue in the 2nd ACMM Court Bengaluru.