Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 KABC010086082024 IN THE COURT OF THE LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL, SESSIONS JUDGE: BENGALURU CITY Dated this the 06 th day of April, 2024 -: PRESENT :- SMT.NISHARANI A.C., B.A., LL.B., III ACC & SJ, Bengaluru C/C LXI ACC & SJ Bangalore, (CCH-62) CRL. MISC. No.3051/2024 Petitioner/s : 1. Gulnaz Begum W/o.Nasir Hussain Aged 52 years

2. Nasir Hussain S/o.Late Zaheer Hussain Aged about 58 years

3. Muddassir Hussain S/o.Nasir Hussain Aged about 28 years

Petitioners No.1 to 3 are R/a.No.17, 3rd Cross Near Masjid J.C. Nagar Bengaluru-06. (By Sri.Naresh Babu.R.P, Adv.) Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 V/s. Respondent : The State by JC Nagar Police Station Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru.) ORDER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION ONE FILED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 438 OF Cr.P.C. This criminal Mis. Petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking the relief of anticipatory bail in relation to the case bearing No-Cr.No.20/2024, which is registered by the JC Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru alleging that petitioners have committed the offences punishable under Section 120B, 418, 420, 447, 448, 324, 351, 352,415, 417 R/w. Section 34 of IPC.

2. The petitioners contents that they are innocent of the

alleged offences and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case and the dispute is purely civil in nature nd complainant has already filed suit in OS No.5507/2022 before this Court i.e., CCH-62 for the relief of permanent injunction and this court was pleased to grant ex-parte interim temporary injunction and at no point of time the Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 petitioners have evicted the complainant and they are permanent residents of the address as shown in the cause title of the petition and petitioner No.1 is a lady aged about 50 years and petitioner No.2 is Senior Citizen and they are law abiding citizens and they have no bad antecedences and the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and they are ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this court and they are also ready to offer solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Court for their release on bail, hence they is are entitled for bail.

3. On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor has

filed his objections along with the report of the I.O. & opposed the above application that the grounds urged for seeking anticipatory bail are not satisfactory & the materials placed on record prima-facie discloses the involvement of the petitioners in commission of the alleged offences and now at this stage if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail then they may threaten, abscond and tamper the prosecution witnesses & accordingly prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

4. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the

points that arise for my consideration are as follows; Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 1) Whether the anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., deserves to be allowed? 2) To what Order?

5. I have carefully perused the entire materials available

on record and heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

6. Now, my findings on the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1 – In Affirmative with conditions Point No.2 – As per final Order, for the following; R E A S O N S

7. Point No.1:- It is alleged by the complainant that

property bearing Municipal No.69, Old Municipal No.9/1 situated at Muniswamappa road, Marappa Block, 2nd Main Road, Munireddy Palya, Bengaluru was originally owned and possessed by one Smt.Janab Mehboob Bi having acquired the same under registered sale deed dt.08.03.1951 and who in turn had executed Gift Deed dt.28.03.1964 in favour of her Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 son namely Abdul Gaffar and the said Abdul Gaffar had executed sale deed dt.24.08.1982 in favour of Abdul Shukoor in respect of the above mentioned property measuring east to west 30 ft. and north to south 16 ft. totally measuring 480 sq. ft. and after demise of Abdul Shukoor his wife & children had succeeded to the estate of the deceased and they have offered to let out the premises and after negotitions the mother had executed the lease agreement dt.22.01.2022 in favour of the complainant and had received a sum of Rs.5 Lakhs as a lease amount which was an interest free refundable deposit and no rent was payable in respect of the property and the said lease agreement is still subsisting on the owners since they have succeeded to the schedule property by inheritance and the land lord of the complainant without knowledge and information of the complainant had negotiated for sale in respect of the schedule property and during the substance of the lease agreement dt.22.02.2022 and the accused persons were claiming to be the subsequent purchaser of the schedule property are making hasty arrangements to dispose of the complainant without due process of law and the complainant is in constructive legal possession of the schedule property and until determination and proper attornment of the lease the complainant cannot be evidence by the petitioners and the during the subsistence of the lease agreement the land lord have tried to evict the complainant without due process of law and complainant has filed OS No.5507/2022 for the Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 relief of permanent injunction and then the petitioners have filed this petition for grant of anticipating bail for the offence punishable under section 120B, 418, 420, 447, 448, 324, 351, 352,415, 417 R/w. Section 34 of IPC.

8. Now, it is the contention of the petitioners that they

are innocent of the alleged offences and they have not at all committed the alleged offences and they are ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the court for his release on bail.

9. On the other hand though the prosecution has

opposed the case of the petitioners that if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail then they may threaten, abscond and tamper the prosecution witnesses is concerned, the same do no hold any water as the cause title of the petition & copy of the FIR and copy of PCR one produced by them shows that they are permanent residents of Bengaluru and as such their presence can be easily secured before the court & I.O.

10. I am aware that this Court cannot and is not

supposed to sift the evidence made available by the prosecution at the time of deciding the bail petition. However, only for the purpose of deciding that whether the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail or not, I discuss the facts alleged Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 by the prosecution and whatever I say, while disposing of this bail petition, cannot be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the of the main case.

11. And more over since the alleged offences under

Section 120B, 418, 420, 447, 448, 324, 351, 352,415, 417 R/w. Section 34 of IPC are not at all punishable with death or life imprisonment and since the alleged offences against the petitioners appears to be a civil in nature and since in the ruling of 2020(1) KCCR SN 29 (SC) it has been clearly held that – 'When the matter is civil in nature, the continuation of criminal proceedings will be abuse process of law' and since the alleged offences against the petitioners has to be decided through a thorough trial and since the apprehension of the prosecution could be met by imposing stringent conditions then looking into the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners have made out a prima-facie case for grant of anticipatory bail subject to conditions and accordingly, I have answered the above point No.1 in affirmative.

12. Point No.2 :- In view of the discussion made on

point No.1 and further holding it in the affirmative, I proceed to pass the following:- Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024 O R D E R The anticipatory bail petition one filed by the petitioners u/s 438 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed subject to following conditions;

1. That in the event of arrest of the

petitioners in Cr. No.20/2024 of respondent Police they shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for each petitioner for the like sum amount.

2. That the petitioners shall not hold any

threat to the complainant and shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

3. That the petitioners shall not leave the

jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.

4. That the petitioners shall furnish their

residential address proof and that of their surety.

5. That the petitioners shall not indulge in

similar type of offences in future.

6. That the petitioners shall appear before

the trial court regularly without fail on receipt of the summons. Crl. Misc. No.3051/2024

7. That if the petitioners fails to obey any

of the above said conditions, then this bail order automatically stands cancelled. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 06th day of April, 2024). (NISHARANI A.C) C/C LXI ACC & SJ, B’luru.