Karnataka High Court
Polamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 June, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3874/2017
BETWEEN:
1. POLAMMA W/O LATE RAMADASS,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
OCC:AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. 7/9TH WARD,
HOSPET 583 201, BELLARY DISTRICT
2. B. RAMAYYA S/O. B. VONDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
OCC:AGRICULTURIST,
R/O BOMMANAHAL MANDALA-515 871
DEVAGIRI TALUK,
ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT
ANDRAPRADESH
3. PARVATHI W/O. SRINIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
OCC:HOUSEWIFE
R/O.PANDURANGA COLONY,
ANANTHASAYANAGUDI VILLAGE,
583 201, HOSPET TALUK
BELLARY DISTRICT
4. MURALI S/O SUNKAPPA,
AGED AOBUT 32 YEARS
OCC:NIL, R/O GANDHI NAGAR,
HOSPET, 583 201
BELLARY DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.D.M.BANDI, ADVOCATE)
:2:
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH:POLICE INSPECTOR
RURAL POLICE STATION,
HOSAPETE-583 201
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BANGALORE-560 001.
... RESPONDENT.
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF
CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS PRAYING
THAT BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.185/2016 OF
HOSPET RURAL POLICE STATION, BALLARI FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNIHSABLE UNDER SECTIONS 197, 199, 420, 465, 468,
120(B) READ WINT SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent Police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 197, 199, 420, 465, 468, 120(B) Read With :3: Section 149 OF IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.185/2016.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments are that, one Smt.Saraswati wife of N.Srinivas filed the private complaint PCR No.268/2016 before the Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Hosapete and it was referred to the police for investigation and to report. It is alleged in the complaint that, the accused persons by creating false documents so also the entries in the said property extracts colluding with each other sold the property which was in the name of the deceased. The further allegation that even the Revenue Authorities who also colluded with the other accused persons and before making other entry without issuing the notice to the complainant, proceeded to entered the names of the accused persons and they have also joined the hands in committing the alleged offences.
:4:
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners made the submission that, looking to the contents of the complaint and also the other materials produced on record prima- facie it goes to show that matter is civil in nature. It is also his submission that, if the Revenue Authorities have wrongly entered the names of the some of the accused herein, same can be challenged by preferring the appeal before the competent authority. He submitted that, accused persons are innocent and they are not involved in committing the alleged offences. They are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by Court, they can be admitted to anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP has made the submission that, looking to the averments in the private complaint, serious allegations are made against the accused persons that, they are in collusion with the :5: Revenue Authorities creating the documents by making the wrong entries in the Revenue records, even without bringing to the notice of complainant, hence he made the submission that, the allegations made in the complaint prima-facie goes to show the involvement of these petitioners and other accused persons in committing the alleged offences. Hence he submitted to reject the bail petition.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, and also the contents of the private complaint and other documents produced by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners along with the petition, so also the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hosapete rejecting the bail application of the petitioners herein. Looking to the allegations made in the private complaint, it goes to show that, though the property stands in the name of the deceased, without bringing to the knowledge of the complainant the accused persons in collusion with the Revenue Authorities got entered their names and then sold :6: the property. Hence it is his contention that the accused persons have committed the alleged offences. Looking to the contents of the complaint, there are serious allegations against the petitioners herein. Therefore, it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners herein for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Ckk