Karnataka High Court
Smt. Rekha W/O Suresh Mundaragi vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 June, 2018
Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
CRL.P.No.101030/2018
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101030/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. REKHA W/O SURESH MUNDARAGI
AGED ABOUT: 44 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: KINNALL ROAD, KOPPAL,
TQ & DIST: KOPPAL.
2. SHRI.SURESH S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA MUNDARAGI
AGED ABOUT: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KINNALL ROAD, KOPPAL,
TQ & DIST: KOPPAL.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. B. SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH KOPPAL TOWN POLICE STATION,
KOPPAL, REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD-580011.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.200/2015 OF KOPPAL TOWN
P.S. FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 465 &
471 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC.
CRL.P.No.101030/2018
:2:
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the materials placed before this Court.
2. The present petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking the relief of anticipatory bail in Crime No.200/2015 of respondent Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465 and 471 R/w. Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that, on the basis of the private complaint lodged by one Sri. Mahesh Umachagi, the respondent police have registered a case in their station Crime No.200/2015 against the present petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465 and 471 R/w. Section 34 of the IPC.
CRL.P.No.101030/2018:3:
The summary of the private complaint lodged by the complainant Sri. Mahesh is that, he being an Ayurvedic doctor practicing at Koppal, intended to purchase a plot and put up construction for his clinic and residential purposes. In that regard, the present petitioners, who were his patients for more than ten years, offered to sell a plot said to be belonging to them, representing that the said plot was duly converted by the appropriate Authority and also been approved by the Koppal Town Planning Authority as a residential plot duly converted. Believing the representation made by the petitioners and the documents shown by them, the complainant got the said plot purchased in the name of his wife for a sum of `3,58,000/-. Thereafter, when he proceeded to put up the construction, he came to know through a local body that the said plot purchased by him was a portion of a larger extent of converted land, which conversion was with a condition that the entire land was required to be used as a single unit and was not amenable to sub-division. CRL.P.No.101030/2018 :4: However, the plot sold to the complainant was one of seven such sub-division plots made by the petitioners/accused. Alleging that the accused/petitioners while showing him the documents pertaining to property, had shown a fabricated and concocted approval letter issued by the Town Planning Authority and persuaded him to purchase the property, the complainant had lodged the complaint.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, even according to the complainant, it is only after he visiting the site and perusing the documents, had purchased the property. Further, the complainant is not the purchaser of the property, but it was his wife. He further submitted that the alleged offences are not heinous in nature. Still, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest at any time by the respondent police.
5. The learned HCGP, both in his statement of objection and arguments submitted that, the alleged CRL.P.No.101030/2018 :5: offence is a clear case of cheating an innocent purchaser and also creating of false documents. As such, the petitioners do not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. Even if the contents of the complaint are taken to be true at present, still, all that can be noticed is that, the complainant himself has stated that he was furnished with the documents by the accused before selling the plot to him. It is not known at this stage as to why the genuinety and authenticity of the documents were not ascertained by the complainant before purchasing the property. Even assuming that false documents were shown to him by the petitioners, still the same would not be a heinous offence warranting apprehension of the accused and retaining them in judicial custody for the purpose of any investigation. Simultaneously, the submission of the learned HCGP that the apprehension of the accused is required for investigation purposes is also not corroborated. However, the other apprehension of the prosecution that the accused may flee from justice, can be CRL.P.No.101030/2018 :6: checked by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
In the event the petitioners/accused are arrested by the Koppal Town Police Station in Crime No.200/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465 and 471 R/w. Section 34 of the IPC, they shall be enlarged on the relief of anticipatory bail subject to the following conditions;
(i) They shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the enlarging Authority.
(ii) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every 2nd and 4th Wednesday between 09.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and mark their attendance till the charge sheet is filed.
(iii) They shall not hamper or tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner.CRL.P.No.101030/2018 :7:
(iv) They shall voluntarily surrender before the jurisdictional Magistrate within two weeks from today and may file an application for regular bail. In such an event, the said Court to dispose of the said bail application not being influenced by the order passed in this matter.
Sd/-
JUDGE gab