The Court of the LX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-61), presided over by Sri Narashimsa M.V., B.Com., LL.B., delivered a judicial order on April 10, 2024, partly allowing an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The ruling in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 3074/2024 granted pre-arrest bail protection exclusively to petitioner No. 3 / Accused No. 4 (Smt. Nagarathna), while rejecting the anticipatory bail pleas of petitioner No. 1 / Accused No. 1 (Sri Manjunath R.) and petitioner No. 2 / Accused No. 3 (Sri Krishna G.N.) in connection with Crime No. 171/2024 registered by the Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru. The accused faced allegations involving offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Matrix and Prosecution Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated from a first information report lodged by Smt. Suma Srinivas Achar regarding a prime real estate dispute in Bengaluru:

• Title Acquisition by Complainant: The complainant claimed ownership of site No. 5, BBMP Khatha No. 5/5/5, measuring 2,880 sq. ft. (East to West 72 feet, North to South 40 feet) situated at Ward No. 159, Kengeri Upanagara, Kengeri Satellite Town Extension, having acquired the same through a registered Gift Deed dated February 15, 1984, executed by her relative K.S. Shettagopalan (who had originally purchased it from the BDA allottee Munirathnam via a sale deed dated April 19, 1983).
• Discovery of Fraud & Bank Loan: After receiving information from one Santhosh, the complainant obtained an encumbrance certificate and was shocked to discover that the property reflected the name of Smt. Nagarathna (Accused No. 4) as owner, and that a mortgage loan had already been availed against the property from Canara Bank, Seshadripuram Branch, by offering it as collateral.
• The Chain of Transactions: Upon visiting the bank and meeting regional management alongside G.N. Krishna and Manjunath, it was revealed that one Kalyan Gowda had purportedly executed a sale deed in favor of R. Manjunath on June 13, 2007, based on an old General Power of Attorney (GPA) dated April 21, 1994, executed by the original allottee Munirathnam (who had passed away on January 10, 2004). Subsequently, R. Manjunath gifted the property to Nagarathna on December 28, 2017. Furthermore, the accused allegedly brainwashed the complainant to execute a sale agreement dated August 12, 2022, in favor of Dhakshayini P.

Details of the Petitioners

• Petitioner No. 1 / Accused No. 1: Sri Manjunath R., son of Late Sri Rame Gowda, aged about 65 years, residing at No. 2037, Broad Road, Vijayapura, Chikkamagaluru – 577101.
• Petitioner No. 2 / Accused No. 3: Sri Krishna G.N., son of Sri Nanjaiah, aged about 64 years, residing at No. 1011/1345, 2nd Phase, 1st H Main Road, 8th Street, Girinagara, Bengaluru – 560086.
• Petitioner No. 3 / Accused No. 4: Smt. Nagarathna, wife of Sri Krishna G.N., aged about 59 years, residing at No. 1011/1345, 2nd Phase, 1st H Main Road, 8th Street, Girinagara, Bengaluru – 560086.
• Legal Representation: Sri Pramod Gowda T.P., Advocate for the petitioners; Learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

Submissions Advanced by the Parties

On Behalf of the Petitioners

1. False Implication: The defense maintained that the petitioners were bona fide purchasers and holders of documents, that no such criminal incident occurred as alleged, and that they were falsely implicated due to civil property disputes.
2. Harassment by Police: Counsel argued that the police repeatedly summoned and threatened the petitioners with coercive arrest, creating a genuine apprehension of detention for non-bailable offences.

On Behalf of the Respondent (State)

1. Opposition to Pre-Arrest Bail: The learned Public Prosecutor filed detailed objections and memo of instructions from the Investigating Officer, asserting that the accused acted in criminal conspiracy to fabricate historical title documents and GPAs to usurp valuable land.
2. Need for Custodial Interrogation: The state emphasized that custodial interrogation of Accused Nos. 1 and 3 was vital to trace the elusive Kalyan Gowda, unearth the root of the fabricated GPA, and investigate the financial fraud linked to the bank loan.

Judicial Findings and Legal Reasoning

LX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Narashimsa M.V. evaluated the rival contentions, documents, and chain of title, recording distinct findings:

1. Scrutiny of Title Chain: The court noted that original allottee Munirathnam had executed a valid sale deed in favor of K.S. Shettagopalan on April 19, 1983, followed by a gift deed to the complainant in 1984. Conversely, Accused No. 1 claimed purchase in 2007 via an old GPA allegedly executed by Munirathnam (who died in 2004) through Kalyan Gowda, subsequently gifting it to his sister, Accused No. 4, in 2017.
2. Implausibility of Bona Fide Transaction: The judge observed that it is highly improbable for Accused No. 1 to have purchased the property for ₹30 Lakhs in 2017 without checking encumbrance certificates or noticing prior registered sale and gift deeds spanning decades, pointing to deliberate document fabrication.
3. Differentiation Among Accused: The court distinguished between the roles of the accused:
   • Accused No. 4 (Smt. Nagarathna): Being a female beneficiary who received the property through a gift deed from her brother and availed a bank loan, her custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary, making her eligible for pre-arrest bail.
   • Accused No. 1 (Manjunath R.) and Accused No. 3 (Krishna G.N.): As the primary actors who dealt with Kalyan Gowda and engineered the root of the disputed GPA transaction, their custodial interrogation was held to be indispensable, especially given that Kalyan Gowda remained untraced and elusive.

Final Court Order and Disposition

Answering the point for consideration partly in the affirmative, the Sessions Court passed the following order:

• The anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is PARTLY ALLOWED.
• The anticipatory bail application filed by Petitioner No. 1 / Accused No. 1 (Sri R. Manjunath) and Petitioner No. 2 / Accused No. 3 (Sri G. Krishna) is HEREBY REJECTED.
• The anticipatory bail application filed by Petitioner No. 3 / Accused No. 4 (Smt. Nagarathna) is ALLOWED. She shall be enlarged on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with Crime No. 171/2024 of Kengeri Police Station, subject to the following conditions:

1. Personal Bond & Surety: Petitioner / Accused No. 4 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of ₹50,000/- with one surety for the like sum.
2. No Witness Tampering: She shall not disturb, threaten, or hamper prosecution witnesses in any manner.
3. Investigative Cooperation: She shall appear before the Investigating Officer on or before April 29, 2024, and cooperate with the investigation in all respects.
4. Cancellation Clause: Any violation of the aforesaid conditions shall result in the automatic cancellation of anticipatory bail.