KABC010085512024 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.3025/2024 PETITIONER/S:- MANGALAGOWRI. C, s/o Vasudeva Raje Urs, Aged about 58 years, R/at No.2068, 4th Main, 1st Cross, Judicial Colony, Yelahanka Hobli, GKVK, Bengaluru -560065. (By Sri. NN., Advocate) V/s. RESPONDENT:- STATE OF KARNATAKA, By Bagalagunte 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 in Crime No.114/2024 registered by the 2 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 respondent Bagalagunte police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case.-

The complainant has lodged the complaint alleging that the complainant had a company by name Manjushree Interiors. One Umesh was introduced by complainant friend Vikram, Umesh was doing finance, in the year 2022 the complainant asking a loan from Umesh for a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/-, but Umesh has said that he had no huge of that amount, the said Umesh introduced the petitioner, she is found of Dhanabhvruddi Credit Co-operative Society. The complainant further alleged that the petitioner asking for surety of the said loan amount, the complainant gave the property papers Sy.No.95/1, 3/1, measuring 12,523 sq. feet at Bagalagunt Village, Yashwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru and the petitioner assured that after get the legal opinion then disburse the loan amount, in this regard the complainant and petitioner have entered into an agreement of sale, as per the agreement of sale the complainant had received the amount of Rs.35,00,000/- in the year 2012-13, Rs.35,00,000/- in the year 2013-14, Rs.40,00,000/- in the year 2014-15, Rs.40,00,000/- in the year 2015-16 and Rs.45,00,000/- by way of cash and Rs.35,00,000/- received from petitioner through cheque bearing No.023588 drawn on Ujjivan Small Finance Bank, after received the said amount on 25.02.2022 the complainant executed the agreement of sale in favour of petitioner, thereafter the complainant asked to the said amount, but the petitioner did not pay the said amount, when the complainant asked to petitioner come and cancel the said agreement of sale or pay the sale consideration amount that time the petitioner abusing in filthy language and gave life threat to the complainant and the petitioner fraudulently 3 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 get the sale agreement, she cheated the complainant. Alleging the said facts, the complainant has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in Crime No.114/2024 against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC.

3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the same, has preferred

this bail petition on the following among other grounds. The petitioner submits that she is innocent of the alleged offence and she is not aware about the alleged incident occurred on the particular date and time, she neither directly nor indirectly involved in doing the same, even though the petitioner is noway concerned to the alleged crime, bu the complainant has falsely implicated her in the said case. The petitioner submits that the allegations made against the petitioner are totally false and there is no prima facie case against the petitioner. The petitioner submits that there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint and the alleged incident was happened on 01.01.2022 but the complainant lodged the complaint on 21.03.2024 there is a delay of 2 years in lodging the complaint, but the complainant has not explained the delay in lodging the written complaint. The petitioner submits that he hails from respectable family and having deep roots in the society and she is lady and founder of Co-operative society and she is permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title and has no bad antecedents. The petitioner submits that she 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 objections contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner is grievous in nature and also the learned Public 4 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 Prosecutor has further contended that the investigation is still in progress and on perusal of the complaint there is prima facie case against the accused for having committed the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that as the investigation is still in progress at this stage if the petitioner is granted bail there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroy 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.-

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

REASONS

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

arguments contending that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and the complainant approached the petitioner as landlord and he intended to sale the said property, after some negotiation the sale consideration was fixed a sum of Rs.4,10,00,000/- in respect of the said property, out of the said sale consideration amount the complainant had received a sum of Rs.1,55,00,000/- paid to the complainant as advance sale consideration amount from the petitioner in presence of witness and also he has acknowledge the same receipt of sale consideration 5 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 amount and balance sale consideration amount of Rs.2,20,00,000/- paid at the time of execution of sale deed, in this regard the complainant executed a registered agreement of sale deed dated 24.02.222. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the complainant has promised to provide the entire legal document and obtaining the clear title of the said property and agreed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner within stipulated period. After the stipulated period of time, the petitioner approached to complainant and demanded to execute the sale deed is favour of petitioner and the petitioner requested to complainant come and execute the registered sale deed in favour of petitioner, but the complainant postponed the same on one or the other reasons and further requests and demands of petitioner, the complainant avoiding petitioner and the complainant did not come forward to registered the sale deed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint and the alleged incident was happened on 01.01.2022 but the complainant lodged the complaint on 21.03.2024 there is a delay of 2 years in lodging the complaint, but the complainant has not explained the delay in lodging the written complaint. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the petitioner is lady and founder of Co-operative society 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 the learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that the investigation is still in progress and on perusal of the complaint there is prima facie case against the accused for having 6 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 committed the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that as the investigation is still in progress at this stage if the petitioner is granted bail there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.

9. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the complainant

has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the complaint have registered the case in Crime No.114/2024 against the accused. The complainant has alleged that she had a company by name Manjushree Interiors. One Umesh was introduced by complainant friend Vikram, Umesh was doing finance, in the year 2022 the complainant asking a loan from Umesh for a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/-, but Umesh has said that he had no huge of that amount, the said Umesh introduced the petitioner, she is found of Dhanabhvruddi Credit Co-operative Society. The complainant further alleged that the petitioner asking for surety of the said loan amount, the complainant gave the property papers Sy.No.95/1, 3/1, measuring 12,523 sq. feet at Bagalagunt Village, Yashwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru and the petitioner assured that after get the legal opinion then disburse the loan amount, in this regard the complainant and petitioner have entered into an agreement of sale, as per the agreement of sale the complainant had received the amount of Rs.35,00,000/- in the year 2012-13, Rs.35,00,000/- in the year 2013-14, Rs.40,00,000/- in the year 2014-15, Rs.40,00,000/- in the year 2015-16 and Rs.45,00,000/- by way of cash and Rs.35,00,000/- received from petitioner through cheque bearing No.023588 drawn on Ujjivan Small Finance Bank, after received the said amount on 25.02.2022 the complainant executed the agreement of sale in favour of petitioner, thereafter the complainant asked to the said amount, but the petitioner did not pay the said amount, when the complainant asked to petitioner 7 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 come and cancel the said agreement of sale or pay the sale consideration amount that time the petitioner abusing in filthy language and gave life threat to the complainant and the petitioner fraudulently get the sale agreement, she cheated the complainant. In the present case the investigation is still pending and the offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The petitioners having contended that she is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court. The guilt of the accused person has to be proved during the course of trial. The apprehension of the prosecution is that if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. The said apprehension of the prosecution can be satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioner is 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 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 under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The respondent Bagalagunte police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.114/2024 8 Crl.Misc.No.3025/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 of IPC, on execution of personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with one surety each for the like sum 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 she 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.

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, transcribed 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.