Allowed

Mr. Waseem Pasha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2024CRL.P/11883/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioners' application for anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of creating a fraudulent sale deed. The court noted that other co-accused had already been granted bail and that the petitioners were merely confirming witnesses to the transaction. The court directed the release of the petitioners upon arrest subject to conditions including appearance before

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions to appear before IO and trial court, execute bonds, and cooperate with investigation.

Mr. Waseem Pasha Vs State of Karnataka — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11883 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. WASEEM PASHA S/O. MR. IMTHIYAZ PASHA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.210/2 UPPER PALACE, ORCHARDS BALLARY ROAD, SADASHIVANAGAR BENGALURU-560 080.

¶9

MR. ALTHAF S/O. MR. SYED SAB AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT C-57, BHIMMAKKA LAYOUT TIPPU NAGAR, GAURIBIDANUR CHIKKABALLAPURA KARNATAKA-561 208.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SMT. RADHIKA M., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY COMMERCIAL STREET P.S. BENGALURU- 560 001 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001.

¶15

SMT. SULOCHANA W/O. A.K. KUMAR AGED 67 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.62, ARUNACHALAM MODALIER ROAD NARAYANA PILLAI STREET, BHARATHINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI M.R. PATIL, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1 & SRI RAJESH A., ADVOCATE, FOR R-2)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE B.N.S.S., 2023 PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.153 OF 2024 OF COMMERCIAL STREET POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 190, 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) AND 61(2) OF THE B.N.S., 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU.

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Accused Nos.6 and 7 in Crime No.153 of 2024

¶25

registered by Commercial Street Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, are before this Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

F.I.R. in Crime No.153 of 2024 was registered by Commercial Street Police Station, Bengaluru, for the aforesaid offences, against Smt. Yashoda and eight others on the basis of the first information dated 30-9-2024

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶29

received from Smt. Sulochana, wife of Late A.K. Kumar. Apprehending arrest in the said case, the petitioners herein, who are arraigned as accused Nos.6 and 7 in the F.I.R., had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.9303 of 2024 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected on 19-10-2024. Therefore, they are before this Court.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Petition Nos.12246 of 2024 and 12332 of 2024. She submits that accused Nos.8 and 9 have been granted anticipatory bail by the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.9234 of 2024 disposed of on 9-10-2024. The petitioners herein are only confirming witnesses to the sale deed, whereas accused Nos.8 and 9 are the purchasers. Accordingly, she prays to allow the petition.

¶31

Per contra , the learned High Court Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for de facto complainant oppose the petition. They submit that the

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶33

custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required since they have identified accused No.1 as the real owner of the property in dispute. Hence, they pray to dismiss the petition.

¶34

First informant had approached Commercial Street

¶35

Police Station on 30-9-2024 and submitted a typed complaint, wherein it is alleged that accused No.1, who claims right over the property in dispute of which the first informant and her brothers and sisters are real owners, has created a fraudulent sale deed dated 2-8-2024 in favour of accused Nos.8 and 9.

¶36

The petitioners herein are the signatories to the aforesaid sale deed as confirming parties. Accused No.1 is the vendor, accused Nos.8 and 9 are the purchasers and accused Nos.2 to 7 are confirming parties to the sale deed dated 2-8-2024. Accused Nos.2 to 4 have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Petition Nos.12246 of 2024 and 12332 of 2024 and accused Nos.8 and 9, who are the purchasers of the property in dispute,

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶38

have been granted anticipatory bail by the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.9234 of 2024.

¶39

The only allegation against the petitioners herein is that they had signed the aforesaid sale deed as confirming parties. Material on record would go to show that earlier the petitioners had allegedly entered into agreement of sale dated 8-5-2024 with accused No.1 which was cancelled on 3-8-2024. It is in this background, the petitioners have signed the sale deed as confirming parties to the sale deed. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail needs to be answered in the affirmative, subject to appropriate conditions.

¶40

Accordingly, the following:-

¶41

O R D E R

¶42

The petition is allowed . The respondent-Police or

¶43

any other Police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioners in the event of their arrest in Crime No.153 of 2024 registered by Commercial Street Police

¶44

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶45

Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, subject to the following conditions:

¶46

i. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of ` .1,00,000/- each (Rupees one lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶47

ii. The petitioners shall regularly appear before the trial Court, without fail, unless exempted by the trial Court for valid reasons;

¶48

iii. The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they shall cooperate with the Police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon, and

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC:50459 CRL.P No. 11883 of 2024

¶51

iv. The petitioners shall not involve in similar offences in future.

¶52

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶53

KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 72

Mr. Waseem Pasha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Waseem Pasha v. State of Karnataka

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

Govindaraju Alias Govinda Alias Raju Vs State of Karnataka

Govindaraju @ Govinda @ Raju Vs the State of Karnataka

Govindaraju @ Govinda @ Raju Vs the State of Karnataka

Ankith C Vs the State of Karnataka

Kishore H.N. Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mutturaj Vs State of Karnataka