Lokesh G N & Others vs State Of Karnataka By Avalahalli Police Station, Bangalore Rural District. Represented By State Public Prosecutor

M G Uma, J

The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.13/2024 of Avalahalli Police Station, pending on the file of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 464, 468, 471, 504, 506, 120-B read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant - Therese Babu.

Heard Sri. Anand R.V, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. N. Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

“Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

REASONS

The petitioners being accused Nos.1 and 2 are seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. The informant lodged the first information, making specific allegations against the accused for having committed the offence as stated above. It is stated that accused No.8 is the GPA holder of the complainant and by making use of the same, he executed sale deed in favour of accused Nos. 1 and 2, who in turn sold the property in favour of accused Nos. 3 and 4. It is alleged that accused Nos. 1 to 6 have conspired together and fabricated the documents in respect of the land and property in question. Admittedly, the informant had filed suit O.S.No.667/2013, seeking grant of permanent injunction. Similarly accused No.3 filed suit O.S.No.147/2024, seeking similar relief. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that temporary injunction is granted in favour of accused No.3 in the suit against the informant.

It is stated that accused No.3 and 13 are already granted anticipatory bail. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail on the ground of parity, subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed.

The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.13/2024 of Avalahalli Police Station.

The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on their appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge them on bail subject to the following conditions:-

a. The petitioners shall furnish the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

b. The petitioners shall not commit similar offences;

c. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required; and

d. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses.

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by him. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to accept the sureties within a reasonable time.