KABC010161012022
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 22 nd day of June, 2022
Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
PETITIONER/S:-
1.

SMT. UMALATHA
w/o Harish Kumar,
Aged about 45 years,
2.

SRI. HARISH KUMAR,
s/o Puttalakshmana,
Aged about 52 years,
Both are residing at No.1041,
3rd ‘M’ Block, SSI Aread,
Rajajinagar, Bengaluru-560010.
[Accused No.1 & 2]
(By Sri. GV., Advocate)
V/s.

RESPONDENT/S:-
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
By Basaveshwaranagar Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by Public Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
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 petitioners/accused No.2 in Crime No.83/2022
registered by the respondent Basaveshwaranagar police for offences
punishable under Sections 420, 423, 323, 324, 506, 466, 468, 471,
120(A), 107 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2.

Brief facts of the case.-
The complainant has lodged the complaint against the
petitioners alleging that the complainant’s husband late Ravi had
purchased the property bearing No.28/1, Ward No.16, Kamalanagar,
Shakthi Ganapathi Nagar, Bengaluru, measuring 30 x 40 feet through
GPA holder Smt. Shahajada Bee on 27.09.2010. The husband of the
complainant died due to COVID-19 on 17.05.2021. Such being the
circumstances the petitioners colluded with each other and have
created the GPA dated 18.12.2010 executed by late Ravi- husband of
the complainant in favour of the 1st petitioner and thereafter on
03.08.2021 the 1st petitioner has executed a gift deed in favour of the
2nd petitioner. Alleging the same the complainant has filed the private
complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case has been
referred for investigation to Basaveshwaranagara police station. On
receipt of the said complaint the police have registered the case in
Crime No.83/2022 for the offences under Sections 420, 423, 323, 324,
506, 466, 468, 471, 120(A), 107 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
3.

The petitioners being aggrieved by the same have filed
the present petition seeking anticipatory bail on the following among
other grounds. The petitioners submit that they have innocent of the
alleged offence and the complaint has been filed only with a malafide
Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
3
intention. The 1st petitioner is PHD graduate and got doctorate and
she is working as lecturer in reputed college. The petitioners submit
that the complainant is in the habit of filing the complaints and cases
against the petitioners and family members with malafide intention to
extract money from the petitioners and their family members.

The
petitioners submit that the complaint is purely civil in nature and if at all
the alleged gift deed is illegal the complainant has approach the civil
court for cancellation of the documents.

The petitioners submit that
the husband of the complainant executed the GPA in favour of 1st
petitioner in the year 2010 and the complainant was not aware of all
these things as she got married late Ravi in the year 2018 as such the
complainant was stranger to the family of the petitioners hence the
allegation that the GPA is forged is not true.

The petitioners submit
that the 2nd petitioner is doing fabrication business and she is in
possession of the property from past 30 years. The petitioners submit
that they are innocent of the alleged offences and they are permanent
resident of Bengaluru and willing to furnish the surety to the
satisfaction of the court. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.
4.

After service of notice, the learned Public Prosecutor has
filed objection contending that the offences alleged against the
petitioners are heinous in nature and the offences alleged against the
petitioners are under Sections 420, 423, 323, 324, 506, 466, 468, 471,
120(A), 107 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor has
also contended that the complainant has filed private complaint before
the V Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and the same
has been referred for investigation and the police have registered the
case in Crime No.83/2022. The learned Public Prosecutor has further
contended that the investigation is still in progress and the IO has to
4
Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
collect the documents and has to record the statement of the
witnesses and perusal of the complaint there is a prima facie case
against the petitioners and if the petitioners are enlarged on bail there
is every chances of petitioner absconding and hampering the trial.
Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.
5.

Heard the arguments. Now the points that arise for my
consideration.-
6.

1.

Whether the petitioners/accused No.1
& 2 have made out sufficient ground to
allow the petition under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C?

2.

What order?

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 counsel for petitioners has addressed
the arguments contending that the petitioners are innocent of the
alleged offences and also further contended that the allegation of the
complainant is that they have forged and fabricated the GPA executed
by the husband of the complainant. The petitioners counsel further
contended that the GPA has been executed in the year 2010 whereas
the complainant has married the deceased late Ravi in the year 2018.
As such she is unaware of the GPA executed by deceased late Ravi.
The petitioners counsel has also further contended that the alleged
offence are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death and they
are ready and willing to offer surety to the satisfaction of the court and
Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
5
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 petitioners
are grievous in nature and on going through the complaint there is a
prima facie material available against the accused and the
investigation is still in progress if the bail is granted the petitioners
might abscond and threaten the prosecution witnesses and hamper
the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.
9.

On perusal of the documents produced by the prosecution
and the petitioners it is noticed that the complainant has lodged the
private complaint against the petitioners before the V Addl. Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and the trial court has referred the
case for investigation to Basaveshwara Nagar police station.

On
receipt of the said complaint the Basaveshwara Nagar police have
registered the case in Crime No.83/2022 for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 423, 323, 324, 506, 466, 468, 471, 120(A), 107
r/w Section 34 of IPC. On perusal of the complaint averments and the
petition averments it is noticed that the allegation against the
petitioners is that they have forged the GPA of complainant’s husband
and have got executed the gift deed with respect to the property
bearing No.28/1, Ward No.16, Kamalanagar, Shakthi Ganapathi
Nagar, Bengaluru, measuring 30 x 40 feet.

The allegation of the
complainant is that petitioners have forged the GPA of her husband
and the 1st petitioner has executed the gift deed in favour of 2 nd
petitioner on 03.08.2021.

6
10.

Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
The petitioners have contended that the GPA was
executed on 18.12.2010 by the complainant’s husband late Ravi in
favour of 1st petitioner. As such the complainant is not aware of the
said GPA as she married late Ravi in the year 2018.

The petitioners
have also contended that the complainant is in the habit of filing the
cases against the petitioners and their family members as such the
complainant has also filed OS No.3608/2021 before CCH-15 and the
same is pending for consideration and also filed Crime No.240/2021
for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 3 & 4 of the D.P.
Act, against the petitioners and their family members. On perusal of
the documents and the complaint averments it is noticed that the 1 st
petitioner is educated lady and working as lecturer and also the
petitioner is aged about 52 years. The offences alleged against the
petitioners are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The
allegation against the petitioners are to be proved during the course of
trial as the case is still under the stage of investigation.

The
apprehension of the prosecution is that if the bail is granted to the
petitioner, there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the
complainant and the prosecution witnesses and may abscond and
hamper the trial. The said apprehension of the prosecution can be
satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioners
are 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
petitioners, they can be dealt with in accordance with law. Considering
all these facts, I am of the opinion that the petitioners 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’.

Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
7
11.

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
petitioners/accused No.1 & 2 under Section
438 Cr.P.C., is allowed.
The respondent
police
are
directed
Basaveswaranagar
to
release
the
petitioners/accused No.1 & 2 on bail in the
event of their arrest in Crime No.83/2022
registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 420, 423, 323, 324, 506, 466, 468,
471, 120(A), 107 r/w Section 34 of IPC, on
execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/each with one surety for the likesum subject to
the following
CONDITIONS:1.

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

2.

The petitioners shall appear before the
I.O whenever they are called upon for the
purpose of investigation.

3.

The petitioners shall not tamper with the
evidence and shall not threaten, induce
allure the prosecution witnesses in what
so ever manner.

8
4.

Crl.Misc.No.5999/2022
The petitioners shall not involve in any
criminal activity.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced
by me in the Open Court on this 22nd day of June, 2022)
(HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R)
LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.