Karnataka High Court
Smt. Sharadamma vs State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2022
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7926 OF 2022
BETWEEN
1 . SMT. SHARADAMMA
W/O LATE NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
2 . SRI T N RAMESH
S/O LATE NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
3 . SRI T N SRIDHAR
S/O LATE NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
ALL ARE R/O THAGGIKUPPE
KASABA HOBLI
MAGADI TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI BASAVARAJU P., ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
MAGADI POLICE STATION
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI KRISHNA KUMAR K.K., HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR
ARREST IN CR.NO.178/2022 OF MAGADI P.S., RAMANAGARA
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
420,467,468 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, MAGADI.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., for granting anticipatory bail in Crime No.178/2022 registered by Magadi Police Station, Ramanagara district for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Sakamma case came to filed by Magadi Police Station which was referred by Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C and it is 3 alleged that she is having a property bearing Sy.No.32/6 having 4 acres and 30 guntas out of which 2 acres belonging to the complainant and the accused No.1/Jayamma said to have executed the sale deed in the name of the complainant with the fake G.P.A. to the present petitioner No.1/accused No.2 and inturn petitioner No.1 executed gift deed in favour of petitioner No.2/accused No.3 and thereby cheated the complainant. After filing complaint the accused persons approached the complainant and got it confirmed thereafter O.S.No.568/2021 has been filed and there was compromise between parties and the petitioners had undertaken to execute the sale deed within 10 days in favour of complainant and also cancelled the earlier sale deed. Subsequently, the petitioners refused to execute the sale date within 10 days, therefore an execution petition also filed and complaint also filed before the police. After 4 registering case police are making hectic effort to arrest the petitioners, hence they are before this Court.
4. Upon hearing the arguments and perusal of the records, which reveals of course first private complaint which was filed by the complainant thereafter original suit was filed and then compromise between parties had taken place and as per the decree the petitioners said to have executed sale deed after canceling the earlier sale deed in the name of petitioner No.1 but in spite of the lapse of 10 days they have not acted upon as per the compromise gift deed. Therefore, execution said to have failed and the petitioner also said to have executed gift deed in favour of petitioner No.3. Learned counsel produced some documents and submits the gift deed also cancelled and the sale deed also cancelled, as per the compromise decree. The documents produced by the 5 learned counsel which reveals the gift deed as well as sale deed are all cancelled as per compromise decree. Such being the case, considering these facts and circumstances of the case, by imposing certain conditions, if the bail is granted no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, the following, ORDER Accordingly, this Criminal petition is allowed. The respondent/Police are directed to release the petitioners/ Nos.2, 3 and 4 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.178/2022 registered by Magadi Police Station, Ramanagara district for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only), each with two sureties 6 each, for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;
(ii) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order;
(iii) Petitioners shall not directly or
indirectly tamper with any of the
prosecution witnesses;
(iv) Petitioners shall not indulge in any
similar offences;
(v) Petitioners shall be deemed custody for
the purpose of any recovery under
Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; and
(vi) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for the purpose of investigation and 7 If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV