Allowed

Chikkanarasimhaiah @ Chikkanarasaiah v. State by Annapoorneshwari Nagar P.S.

Karnataka HC13 Mar 2023CRL.P/941/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to aged petitioner and his daughter under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The bail was conditional on joining the investigation, completing custodial interrogation within a specific timeframe, and furnishing signatures. The petition was allowed with specific conditions to meet the ends of justice.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail conditional on joining investigation, completing custodial interrogation within a day, and cooperating with the agency by providing signatures.

Chikkanarasimhaiah @ Chikkanarasaiah Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 941 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

CHIKKANARASIMHAIAH @ CHIKKANARASAIAH,

¶9

S/O LATE LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS, R/AT NO.25, IST CROSS, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU - 560 072.

¶10

KUM. SHOBHA C,

¶11

D/O CHIKKANARASIMHAIAH,

¶12

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.25, IST CROSS,

¶13

Digitally signed by C SOWMYA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

AMBEDKAR NAGAR,

¶15

NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU - 560 072.

¶16

…PETITIONERS

¶17

(BY SRI. HARISH PRABHU S, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

STATE BY, ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR P.S. REPRESENTED BY S.P.P, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶20

¶21

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶22

BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶23

…RESPONDENT

¶24

(BY SRI. VINAYAKA, HCGP)

¶25

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.272/2020 OF ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 420, 120B R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE V ACMM, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.8863/2021.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Heard Sri. Harish Prabhu.S, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Vinayaka, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records.

¶29

Present petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:

¶30

“Wherefore, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 named above pray that, this Court may be pleased to pass on order, enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail in C.C.No.8863/2021 (Crime No.272/2020) registered by Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence

¶31

¶32

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶33

punishable under Section 420, 120B, R/w 34 of Indian Penal code, pending before the Hon'ble Vth Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bengaluru, to meet the ends of justice.”

¶34

The brief facts of the case are as under:

¶35

A complaint came to be lodged by Nataraj G.R. S/o. Rangaswamaiah, with the Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police have registered a case in Crime No.272/2020 on 01/12/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120B, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ for short), whereby he has sought for action against the petitioners and others.

¶36

Gist of the complaint averment reveals that in respect of land bearing Sy.No.31 measuring 1 Acre 24 guntas at Nagarabhavi village, which was acquired, power of attorney came to be executed from the first petitioner, later on, it was cancelled and the sale deed was executed in favour of the complainant and the property was acquired earlier, and no rights of the petitioner No.1 has transferred on to the complainant whereby the complainant sought for action.

¶37

¶38

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶39

The petitioner approached the District Court for grant of bail, which was turned down by the learned District Judge by order dated 05.11.2022 in Crl. Misc. No.10496/2022. Thereafter, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶40

Sri. Harish Prabhu.S, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition vehemently contended that other accused person has been granted bail, therefore, on the ground of parity, the present petitioners are also entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶41

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader however opposes the bail petition.

¶42

In the light of the rival contentions, this Court perused the materials on record meticulously.

¶43

Since the petitioner No.1 is aged about 87 years and petitioner No.2 being a lady, they are entitled to an order of anticipatory bail in on ground of parity. However, need of the investigation agency in so far as obtain signature and other relevant materials are to be collected by taking the petitioners into custody.

¶44

¶45

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶46

10. Accordingly, if the petitioners are directed to join

¶47

the investigation and custodial interrogation is completed within a limited period of time, the ends of justice would meet.

¶48

Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

¶49

O R D E R

¶50

The Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶51

Petitioners are directed to join the investigation by appearing before the Investigating Officer on 25.03.2023 at 10.00 am;

¶52

The Investigation officer is at liberty to take the petitioners to custody and complete the custodial investigation on the same day before 5.00 p.m.;

¶53

Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation agency by furnishing their handwriting signature and thumb impression etc., as is required by the investigation agency. If any such incriminating materials are obtained in such custodial interrogation, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file additional supplementary charge sheet alleged under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the petitioners are to be enlarged on bail by taking a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer;

¶54

¶55

CRL.P No. 941 of 2023

¶56

Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly;

¶57

Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/indirectly;

¶58

Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bengaluru District without prior permission;

¶59

If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order.

¶60

Ordered accordingly.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

SMC/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63 STK

Chikkanarasimhaiah @ Chikkanarasaiah v. State by Annapoorneshwari Nagar P.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chikkanarasimhaiah @ Chikkanarasaiah v. State by Annapoorneshwari Nagar P.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Umar Kunhi @ Mohammed Kunhi @ Kunhi Vs State of Karnataka

Ummarkunhi @ Mohammedkunhi @ Kunhi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Ummar Kunhi @ Mohammed Kunhi @ Kunhi Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Rani Vs State by Banasawadi Police Station

Umaidh M Vs the State of Karnataka

Raghu. N Vs the State of Karnataka