A City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru has granted anticipatory bail to three individuals, including a 60-year-old woman, in connection with a high-stakes real estate dispute involving allegations of cheating and criminal conspiracy. The court observed that the conflict appeared to be primarily civil in nature and that the custodial interrogation of the accused was not necessary at this stage.

The order was passed by Sri R. Ravi, the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, in favor of the petitioners: Smt. Lakshmi Devi, aged 60; Manikanta, aged 30; and Gajendra, aged 51. The petitioners sought legal protection following the registration of an FIR (Cr. No. 22/2023) by the Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station for offenses punishable under Sections 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust), 420 (Cheating), and 120B (Criminal Conspiracy) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Case Against Lakshmi Devi and Manikanta

The dispute centers on a property transaction involving 30 guntas of land in Survey No. 141/b. According to the complainant, a real estate developer, the third petitioner, Gajendra, introduced Lakshmi Devi and Manikanta as the absolute owners of the land in 2019. The complainant entered into an agreement and purchased the property for a staggering sum of Rs 2.60 Crores, which was paid via cheque and demand drafts. The sale deed was officially registered on July 17, 2019.

However, the transaction soon hit legal hurdles. The South Indian Watch Company filed a petition before the Deputy Commissioner of Bengaluru, resulting in a stay order on the transfer of the property title. While that matter was eventually resolved in favor of the complainant, a subsequent Writ Petition was filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka by a third party.

The complainant alleged that during these proceedings, Lakshmi Devi and the South Indian Watch Company entered into a secret settlement and a confirmation deed. It was further alleged that the General Power of Attorney (GPA) previously given to the complainant was cancelled as part of a conspiracy to cheat the developer of the property and the invested funds.

Arguments and Judicial Observations

The petitioners, represented by counsel Sri J.D. Sujnana Murthy, argued that they were innocent of any criminal intent. They contended that the dispute was essentially a complex civil matter regarding property rights and litigation outcomes, rather than a criminal act of cheating. They maintained that they were law-abiding citizens with permanent residences in Bengaluru and Kolar, posing no risk of absconding.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea, suggesting that the investigation was in its infancy and that the accused might tamper with evidence or influence witnesses if granted liberty.

In his analysis, Judge R. Ravi highlighted a crucial principle established by the Supreme Court of India: when a matter is essentially civil in nature, continuing criminal proceedings can be an abuse of the process of law. The court noted that the offenses alleged were not punishable by death or life imprisonment and that the primary evidence was documented in the form of registered deeds and court filings.

The judge observed that since the petitioners have permanent addresses and have expressed willingness to cooperate with the police, their presence can be secured without the need for arrest. The court emphasized that the truth of the allegations must be determined through a full-scale trial rather than through pre-trial detention.

Conditions of the Anticipatory Bail

The court allowed the petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., directing that in the event of arrest, the petitioners must be released on bail subject to several stringent conditions to ensure the integrity of the investigation.

Lakshmi Devi, Manikanta, and Gajendra are required to execute a personal bond of Rs 2,00,000 each, supported by two sureties for the same amount. They must appear before the Investigating Officer within 30 days of the order and continue to cooperate with the probe whenever called upon. Furthermore, the petitioners are mandated to mark their attendance at the Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station once a month on every second Saturday until the charge sheet is filed.

The court also prohibited the petitioners from threatening the complainant, tampering with prosecution witnesses, or leaving the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission. Any breach of these conditions will result in the automatic cancellation of the bail order.