KABC010084252024 IN THE COURT OF LXV ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-66) PRESENT SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R , B.A.L., L.L.B., LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Dated this the 5 th day of April, 2024 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 PETITIONER/S:- BHASKAR @ BHASKAR KRISHNA. s/o. Gopalakrishna, Aged about 45 years, R/at No.207, 6th Main, Bikasipura, Bengaluru -560078. [Accused No.1] (By Sri. GNK, Advocate) V/s. RESPONDENT:- STATE OF KARNATAKA, By Hulimavu (CCB) (EOW) Police Station, Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.603/2023 registered by the respondent Hulimavu (CCB) (EOW) police for the 2 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 417 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case.-

The complainant has lodged the complaint alleging that in the year 2018 she had requested the brokers to sell the residential house bearing property No.452, 17th Cross, 36th Main, J.P.Nagar, Bengaluru. In the month of July, 2023 the accused No.4Manjunath called complainant's daughter and informed that one customer by name Bhaskar Krishna is evincing interest in buying the property in that context Manjunath, Bhaskar Krishna and Mahesh visited the complainant's hosue and paid Rs.10,000/- as advance and collected the title deed documents for verification. After collecting the documents, one Arun called complainant's daughter and told that bank officials from SBI & ICICI Bank are visiting for inspection of the said property, who are considering proposal for lending loan. Accordingly, the bank officials visited the said property in the presence of complainant's daughter and after some days Bhaskar Krishna informed the complainant that he could not get loan, therefore he is not interested in purchasing the said house. Later, the CCB police have enquired complainant whether she had any account in ICICI Co-operative Bank, Hoskote, for which the complainant having denied for having any account with the said bank. The police informed the complainant to verify the details at branch, in that regard her grandson went and enquired the same on 06.09.2023 and he has realized a fake account has been opened in the name of the complainant of Rs.1,50,00,000/- have been transferred from SBI, St.Marks Road to the said account and on further enquiry he realized that one Prashanth has purchased the complainant's property by 3 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 availing housing loan from SBI, RACPC, St.Marks Road branch, Bengaluru. The complainant having never sold the property, being cheated has the lodged the complaint before the police. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in Crime No.603/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 417 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Subsequently the case has been transferred to CCB police for investigation. The CCB police during the course of the investigation have arrested the accused persons.

3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the same, has

preferred this bail petition on the following among other grounds. The petitioner submits that he is innocent of the alleged offences and the name of the petitioner is not found either in the FIR or in the complaint, later he has been falsely implicated as accused which clearly shows that a false case has been foisted against him. The petitioner submits that the case is body warrant case, however in the main case ie., in Crime No.384/2023 of Puttenahalli (CCB) police, the petitioner has been granted bail. The petitioner submits that earlier he had filed bail petition before this court in Crl.Misc.No.808/204 in which this court has stated that since the case is body warrant case as such it needs to be recalled and as such the petitioner has withdrawn the said petition on 27.01.2024. The petitioner submits that in the above case the other accused have already granted bail, hence this petitioner is also entitle for his release on bail on the ground of parity. The petitioner submits that the entire allegations made against the petitioner are all false, frivolous, concocted and fabricated one and there are no materials placed on record to show that the petitioner is guilty of the offences and there is no specific 4 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 overt act attributed against the petitioner. The petitioner submits that since from the date of arrest he is in judicial custody if he continued to be in judicial custody, then not only the petitioner but his entire family members would be put to great hardship. The petitioner submits that the offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death and he is permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title and he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co- operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.

4. After service of notice, the learned Public Prosecutor has

appeared and filed objection contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner is grievous in nature and also further contended that the amount involved in the alleged offence is more than Rs.1,00,00,000/-. The learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that the complaint averments prima facie shows that the accused persons have committed the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that as the case is still under the stage of investigation, at this stage if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed, there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.

5. Heard the arguments. Now the points that arise for my

consideration.-

1. Whether the petitioner has made out sufficient ground to allow the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C?

2. What order?

6. My answer to the above points are.- 5 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024

Point No.1:– In the Affirmative Point No.2:– As per final order for the following

REASONS

7. Point No.1:- The petitioner counsel has addressed the

arguments contending that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and the name of the petitioner is not found either in the FIR or in the complaint, later he has been falsely implicated as accused which clearly shows that a false case has been foisted against him. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the case is body warrant case, however in the main case ie., in Crime No.384/2023 of Puttenahalli (CCB) police, the petitioner has been granted bail. The petitioner submits that earlier he had filed bail petition before this court in Crl.Misc.No.808/204 in which this court has stated that since the case is body warrant case as such it needs to be recalled and as such the petitioner has withdrawn the said petition on 27.01.2024. The petitioner counsel has further contended that in the above case the other accused have already granted bail, hence this petitioner is also entitle for his release on bail on the ground of parity. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the entire allegations made against the petitioner are all false, frivolous, concocted and fabricated one and there are no materials placed on record to show that the petitioner is guilty of the offences and there is no specific overt act attributed against the petitioner. The petitioner counsel has further contended that since from the date of arrest he is in judicial custody if he continued to be in judicial custody, then not only the petitioner but his entire family members would be put to great hardship. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with 6 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 imprisonment for life or death and the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co-operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor has addressed the

arguments contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner is grievous in nature and also further contended that the amount involved in the alleged offence is more than Rs.1,00,00,000/-. The learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that the complaint averments prima facie shows that the accused persons have committed the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that as the case is still under the stage of investigation, at this stage if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed, there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.

9. On perusal of the complaint it is noticed that the

complainant has lodged the complaint alleging that she has not sold her property to any one nor she has opened any account in BDCC Co-operative Bank, Hoskote and also has further alleged that one Prashanth has purchased the complainant's property by availing loan from the St.Marks Road, Bengaluru. The complainant having never sold the property and being cheated has lodged the complaint. The police during the course of investigation have arrested the accused No.6Bank Manager of SBI, St.Marks Road and has been remanded to judicial custody. The accused from the date of arrest is in judicial custody. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 417 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The 7 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the amount involved in the alleged offence is huge and if the bail petition of the accused is allowed there is every chances of petitioner threatening the prosecution witness, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. The petitioner has contended that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co-operate with the investigation. The petitioner has contended that the SBI Bank being cheated by the purchaser and the seller has also lodged the complaint before the police in Crime No.5/2024 wherein the said complaint has been registered against the purchaser of the property and the seller of the property ie., the complainant, the same is also pending for investigation as the both case filed by the complainant and the SBI, St.Marks Road branch are pending for investigation. The petitioner has contended that the accused No.6 has been granted bail in the above case in Crl.Misc.No.423/2024, hence this petitioner is also entitle for bail on the ground of parity. As such the case is still pending for investigation at this stage it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed the alleged offences. The guilty of the accused has to be proved during the course of trial. The petitioner has contended that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co-operate with the investigation. The apprehension of the persecution can be satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioner is the resident of the address shown in the cause title. If at all during the course of trial, the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the petitioner, he can be dealt with in accordance with law. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be enlarged 8 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024 on bail by imposing certain conditions, which would meet the apprehension of prosecution. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1 in the Affirmative.

10. Point No.2:- In view of the findings given on point No.1,

I proceed to pass the following.-

ORDER

The petition filed by the petitioner/ accused No.1 under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The respondent Hulimavu (CCB) (EOW) police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his in Crime No.603/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 417 r/w Section 34 of IPC, on execution of personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum subject to the following CONDITIONS:-

1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing and shall cooperate with the investigation.

2. The petitioner shall appear before the I.O whenever he is called upon for the purpose of investigation.

3. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten, induce allure the prosecution witnesses in what so ever manner. 9 Crl.Misc.No.2973/2024

4. The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activity.

5. The petitioner shall produce the permanent address proof document.

(Directly dictated to the Stenographer online computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 5th day of April, 2024) (HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R) LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.