Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 KABC010086402024 IN THE COURT OF THE XXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 9) AND HOLDING CONCURRENT CHARGE OF LXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 70) BANGALORE CITY Dated this the 18th day of April, 2024 PRESENT Sri. Hareesha A., B.A.,LL.B, XXVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 9) and also holding concurrent charge of the court of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 70). Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 Petitioners: 1. M.Basavaraju s/o N.R.Mallikarjunaiah, aged about 47 years,
2. M.Rudraradya, s/o N.R.Mallikarjunaiah, aged about 43 years,
both are r/at No. 57, Arunagiri, 16th cross, JP nagar 4th phase, Bengaluru 560 076. Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 (By M/s Reddy and Reddy Associates Advocate) V/S Respondent : State of Karnataka by Mico layout P.S, B`lore (Represented by Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/SEC. 438 OF CR.P.C. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this court under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) citing a reasonable apprehension of imminent arrest by the respondent police, in connection with Crime No. 126/2023 PCR No.3337/2023 , wherein the petitioners stands as as accused No.1 to 10 of offences punishable u/sec. 149, 418, 419, 420, 448, 465, 468, 469, 470, 471, 415, 416, 417, 441, 442, 463, 464 of Indian Panel Code.
2. The petitioners pleading false implication and absence
of primafacie material supporting the commission of offences Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 necessitating punishable u/sec. 149, 418, 419, 420, 448, 465, 468, 469, 470, 471, 415, 416, 417, 441, 442, 463, 464 of Indian Panel Code, expressing genuine apprehension of imminent arrest by the respondent police, sought for his release on pre arrest bail.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has filed
objection contending that, there exists primafacie material on record indicating that the petitioner has allegedly committed the offences in question, hence sought to dismiss the petition.
4. I have heard the argument an perused the petition
averments. The point that would arise for my determination is:
1. Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to enlarge him on bail u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C.?
2. What order?
5. My answer is in the affirmative for the following;
REASONS
6. POINT NO.1; The complainant by name Vijaykumar
resident of Kottanuru Dinne main road, JP nagar 7th phase, Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 Bengaluru approached the VI ACMM , Bengaluru u/sec. 200 of Cr.P.C. to prosecute the petitioners and other accused for the offences punishable u/sec. 149, 418, 419, 420, 448, 465, 468, 469, 470, 471, 415, 416, 417, 441, 442, 463, 464 of Indian Panel Code. The learned Magistrate acting u/sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. directed the respondent police to conduct the investigation, based on which the FIR in Cr. No. 126/2023 came to be registered for the aforesaid offences, during the course of investigation the police have recorded statement of the complainant. As per the allegations, the accused No.1 and 2 herein happens to be the close friends of complainant was managing the residential building of the complainant and the complainant was working at Orissa. It is alleged that the accused No.1 and 2 without the knowledge of the complainant who is the owner of the building, let out 24 houses to the petitioners herein and received lease amount of Rs, 1,09,00,000/ as lease amount from them. Further, it is alleged that the complainant was informed that no one came to the house for lease and when the bank people issued notice to Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 repay the loan amount, through the persons who were on lease in the building the complainant came to know about the alleged offence, immediately the complainant approached the respondent police and Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru South, but the police have refused to take the action. Hence he has filed the complaint before the VI ACMM.
7. I have perused the allegations made in the complaint
and the grounds urged in the petition. The other accused persons have already been enlarged on bail , apart from that on perusal of the complaint allegations it appears that the complainant had executed power of attorney in favor of the petitioners to manage the property including to let it out for rent. As per the case of the prosecution the complainant had executed the Power of Attorney in favor of the petitioners on 11.12.2020 and thereafter he did not turn up to see the position and possession of the property which handed over to the petitioners. Admittedly the petitioners were the original owners from whom the complainant had purchased the property in which the residential houses are constructed. The Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024 learned counsel for petitioners has contended that the cheque issued by the complainant for the sale consideration amount has been dishonored and there is dispute between the petitioners and the complainant on that account. As discussed supra, the other accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. I am of the view that since the case of the prosecution is based on the documentary evidence, it is just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Apart from that the alleged offences are though non bailable in nature, they are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and they are triable by the court of Magistrate of First Class. To address the prosecution's concerns regarding the potential flight risk, stringent conditions can be imposed as a measure to mitigate such apprehensions. Accordingly the Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
8. Point No.2: By considering the above over all reasons
this court proceed to pass the following; Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024
ORDER
The petition filed u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioners is hereby allowed. In the event of arrest of petitioners, in connection with Cr. No. 126/2023 registered by the respondent police station for the offence punishable u/sec. 149, 418, 419, 420, 448, 465, 468, 469, 470, 471, 415, 416, 417, 441, 442, 463, 464 of Indian Panel Code, the respondent police hereby directed to release them on bail, on obtaining their personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/ each with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating officer, subject to the following conditions.
1. The petitioners shall appear before the police and trial court as and when summoned for the purpose of investigation or trial.
2. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the Prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
3. The petitioners shall not commit similar offence. Crl.Misc.No.3063/2024
4. The petitioners shall cooperate for investigation.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade I, transcript thereof is corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 18th day of April, 2024) (Hareesha A.) XXVII Addl. CC & SJ holding c/c of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,Bangalore.