Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 KABC010086792024 IN THE COURT OF THE LX ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 61) : Present : Sri Narashimsa.M.V., B.Com., LL.B., LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Dated: This the 10th day of April 2024. : Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024: PETITIONERS/ 1) Sri.Manjunath R. ACCUSED :- S/o. Late Sri Rame Gowda, Aged about 65 years, R/at 2037, Broad Road, Vijayapura, Chickamagaluru-577101. (A1) 2) Sri.Krishna G.N., W/o. Sri.Nanjaiah, Aged about 64 years, (A3) 3) Smt.Nagarathna, W/o. Sri.Krishna G.N., Aged about 59 years. (A4) (Pet.No.2 and 3 are r/at No.1011/1345, 2nd Phase, 1st H Main Road, 8th Street, Girinagara, Bengaluru-560 086.) (Rep by Sri. Pramod Gowda T.P., Advocate) V/s Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 RESPONDENT : The State of Karnataka By : Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru. (Rep. by: Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
Accused No.1, 3 and 4 in Kengeri Police Station Crime No. 171/2024 have filed this application under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C for anticipatory bail. They are alleged to have committed offence punishable u/S 120(B), 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case as forthcoming from first
information lodged by Smt. Suma Srinivas Achar are: The complainant is owner of property bearing Site No.5, BBMP Khatha No.5/5/5, measuring East to West: 72 feet and North to South 40 feet, totally measuring 2880 sq.ft. Situated at Ward No.159, Kengeri Upanagara, Kengeri Satellite town Extension, Bangalore South Taluk having acquired by virtue of Gift Deed dated.15.02.1984. Later upon information received from Santhosh the complainant has obtained E.C of her property and was shocked to see that name of Nagarathna was reflecting as owner and that she has already availed loan in Canara Bank, Sheshadripuram . When complainant went there, she was directed to go to Regional Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 Manager, Basavanagudi, Bangalore of Canara Bank, wherein G.N.Krishna and Manjunath K.N. were also present and they stated that, one Kalyan Gowda has sold property to R.Manjunath on 13.06.2007. The said R.Manjunath has gifted the schedule property to Nagarathna on 28.12.2017. The accused persons have brainwashed the complainant and obtained sale agreement dated.12.08.2022 in favour of Dhakshayini P. in respect of schedule property.
3. The grounds urged in this petition are that:
(a) Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences and are having valid and tenable defence. The offence alleged against petitioners are non-bailable in nature, but not exclusively punishable with imprisonment for life or death. There is no such incident had taken place as narrated in complaint, the respondent police often and then summoned the petitioners to police station and harassing them for extraneous reasons with oblique motive and respondent police have threatened that they would implicate petitioners in the above crime. (b) Apart from that respondent police kept on calling petitioners threatening them that they would take coercive steps, if Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 they don’t come to the police station. Under these facts and circumstances there is a reasonable apprehension of arrest of petitioners by respondent police in the above crime for non-bailable offences. There is no proper relationship or sequences mentioned to co-relate the situation. The petitioners are bonafide purchasers of said property on the basis of documents. They are senior law abiding citizens. The complainant is neither the owner nor in possession of said property. Intentionally to harass petitioners, the complainant has lodged complaint against petitioners. Therefore, prima-facie allegations against accused are frivolous and far from truth. The petitioners are permanent resident of address given in cause title and they hail from respectable family having deep roots in society. The present petitioners submits that they are ready and willing to abide by any terms and conditions that may be imposed by this court and ready to furnish surety to satisfaction of this court.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has filed detailed objections to
bail application along memo of instructions given by Investigating Officer. In objections averments made in first information are reiterated. In memo of instructions given by investigating officer, investigation that has proceeded is narrated. Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024
5. It is stated that accused are not entitled to be enlarged on
bail, if they are granted anticipatory bail, there is every possibility of they threatening witnesses and destructing the evidence collected against them. Hence, prayed for rejection of bail petition.
6. Counsel for petitioners filed certified copy of Order
sheet and plaint in O.S.No.8329/2022.
7. Heard the learned Advocate for petitioners and learned
Public Prosecutor.
8. The point that arise for consideration is :
Whether Anticipatory bail application filed by accused No.1, 3 and 4 in Kengeri Police Station crime No. 171/2024 deserves to be allowed ?
9. My finding to the above point is in the Partly in the
Affirmative for the following :- R E A S O N S
10. POINT No.1:- Along with this bail application, certified
copy of FIR in Kengeri P.S. Crime No.171/2024, First information is produced.
11. First informant claims that her relative
K.S.Shettagopalan executed a Gift deed dated.15.02.1984 in her Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 favour, wherein Site No.5 , 80 feet Road, 1st Main Road, Kengeri Satellite town was gifted to her. It is stated in first information that on 11.07.2022 first informant obtained E.C., and learnt that the name of owner of aforesaid site is being reflected as Nagarathna (accused No.4). Further first informant learnt that accused No.3 Krishna G (husband of accused No.4) had obtained loan in Canara Bank, Sheshadripuram branch, as collateral to the said loan A4 had offered the aforesaid property.
12. Accused No.4 in turn claims that her brother/ accused
No.1 has gifted property to her on 28.12.2017, Accused No.1 claims that he has purchased the property from Munirathnam (original allottee from BDA who died on 10.01.2004 ) through his GPA Holder Kalyana Gowda, the said GPA is dated.21.4.1994.
13. It is necessary to here that K.S.Shettagopalan has
purchased aforesaid property from Munirathnam vide sale deed dated.19.04.1983.
14. The alienation made against petitioner/accused No.1, 3
and 4 is that they have conspired with each other and have created the documents. Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024
15. From first information it is amply clear that Munirathnam
was the original allottee. Whether the said Munirathnam had executed GPA subsequent to execution of sale deed is a aspect which is to be decided.
16. Accused No.1 is said to have purchased aforesaid
property vide sale deed dated.13.06.2017 for a sum of Rs.30 lakhs. It is unbelievable that Accused No.1 would not have obtained encumbrance certificate and would not have through all the transaction that have taken place in respect of aforesaid property. It is further hard to believe that the sale deed dated.19.04.1983 executed by Munirathnam in favour of K.S.Shettagopalan, Gift deed dated.15.02.1984 executed by K.S.Shettagopalan in favour of first informant would have gone unnoticed. It appears that in the year 2017 few documents were created, which resulted in the sale deed dated 13.06.2017 and the subsequent Gift deed dated.28.12.2017.
17. It is to be not lost sight of that accused No.2 and 4
have obtained loan from Canara Bank by mortgaging property. Accused No.4 is a women, she has received Gift from her brother. Accused No.1 and 3 are the persons who can speak about Kalyan Gowda and the alleged GPA executed by Muniratham in favour of Kalyan Gowda. The genesis of dispute starts with the alleged Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 power of attorney in favour of Kalyan Gowda, accused No.1 is the person who transacted with said Kalyan Gowda. It is to be noted that the root of the dispute starts from Kalyan Gowda. Considering all these aspects, taking into consideration that the whereabouts of Kalyan Gowda is unknown, if accused No.1 and 3 are enlarged on bail there is every possibility of the said Kalyan Gowda remaining elusive. Even though the offences alleged against accused No.1, 3 and 4 are not punishable with death or life imprisonment, this court is of clear opinion that custodial interrogation would be necessary in so far as accused No.1 and 3 are concerned. Hence, I answer above point in the Partly in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: . ORDER Anticipatory Bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. are hereby partly allowed. Anticipatory Bail application filed by petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 R.Manjunath and petitioner No.2/accused No.3 G.Krishna is hereby rejected. Anticipatory Bail application filed by petitioner No.3/accused No.4 Smt.Nagarathna is allowed. She shall be enlarged on bail in Crime No.171/2024 of Kengeri Police Station in the event of her arrest, subject to the following : Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 CONDITIONS 1) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall execute her personal bond for a sum of Rs 50,000/- with one surety for the likesum. 2) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall not disturb the witness, threaten the witnesses, hamper the witness in any manner. 3) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall appear before the investigating officer on or before 29.04.2024 and cooperate with investigation in all respects. 4) If any of the bail conditions are violated anticipatory bail stands canceled. (Dictated to the Stenographer Gr-II, transcribed and typed by him, after corrections, pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 10th day of April, 2024.) (NARASHIMSA.M.V.) LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, VIDE SEPARATE ORDER
ORDER
Anticipatory Bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. are hereby partly allowed. Anticipatory Bail application filed by petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 R.Manjunath and petitioner No.2/accused No.3 G.Krishna is hereby rejected. Anticipatory Bail application filed by petitioner No.3/accused No.4 Smt.Nagarathna is allowed, she shall be enlarged on bail in Crime No.171/2024 of Kengeri Police Station in the event of her arrest, subject to the following : CONDITIONS 5) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall execute her personal bond for a sum of Rs 50,000/- with one surety for the likesum. Crl.Misc.No.3074/2024 6) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall not disturb the witness, threaten the witnesses, hamper the witness in any manner. 7) Petitioner/accused No.4 shall appear before the investigating officer on or before 29.04.2024 and cooperate with investigation in all respects. 8) If any of the bail conditions are violated anticipatory bail standscanceled. (NARASHIMSA.M.V.) LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.