Allowed

H N Dayananda v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC6 Mar 2024CRL.P/1348/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, accused Nos.6 and 7 in a case involving trespass, damage to construction, a disputed sale deed and a bounced cheque, sought anticipatory bail. The court found specific allegations against them only under Sections 427 and 447 IPC with Section 34 and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioners to surrender before IO within ten days with personal bond Rs.2,00,000 each plus two sureties, subject to conditions.

H N Dayananda Vs State of Karnataka by — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:9463 CRL.P No. 1348 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1348 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

H.N.DAYANANDA S/O H.N. NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

¶10

VINAY KUMAR @ VINAY KUMAR ASHOK PATTANA SHETTY S/O ASHOK PATTANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶11

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.133, KCHS LAYOUT, 2^ND STAGE, 5^TH CROSS, NEAR AMRUTHANANDA MAYI ASHRAM, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR BENGALURU-560056.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

(BY SRI. RAKESH B. BHATT, ADVOCATE)

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI. K.DIWAKAR MADDUR, HCGP)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:9463 CRL.P No. 1348 of 2024

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN RESPECT OF C.C.NO.1957/2023 (CR.NO.262/2021) ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 465, 468, 471, 120(b), 447, 427, 420, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No.262/2021 registered by the Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 120-B, 447, 427, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶26

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that on 18.03.2021, the accused Nos.6 and 7 trespassed the property belonging to C.W.1 and caused damage to the construction which they had undertaken by using JCB and caused loss to the tune of Rs.10 lakhs and sale deed was made

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:9463 CRL.P No. 1348 of 2024

¶28

in favour of the accused No.6, who is one of the petitioner in this case and the very same site was sold to C.W.1 and accused Nos.1 to 3 gave Cheque and the said Cheque was also bounced. Hence, complaint is lodged against these petitioners and also other accused person.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit

¶30

that the very averment made in the complaint and also chargesheet material clearly disclose that these petitioners purchased the property long back and the same site was sold to C.W.1 and incident has taken place when he went and enquired with the accused persons and accused No.7, who is the second petitioner is also relative of petitioner No.1 and having taken note of the allegation made against the petitioners, the learned counsel would submit that the allegation against these petitioners is that they caused damage to the construction, which C.W.1 had undertaken.

¶31

Per contra, learned HCGP would submit that specific allegations are made against these two petitioners that along with other accused persons, these petitioners indulged in committing the offence punishable under Sections 465, 468,

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:9463 CRL.P No. 1348 of 2024

¶34

471, 120-B, 447, 427, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶35

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP, specific allegation against these petitioners, who are accused Nos.6 and 7 is that they committed offence punishable under Sections 427 and 447 read with Section 34 of IPC and the allegation against others accused is that they committed the offence punishable under Sections 465, 468 and 420 of IPC. Having taken note of the allegation made against these petitioners and allegation against other accused persons, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶36

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶37

following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.262/2021 registered by the

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:9463 CRL.P No. 1348 of 2024

¶41

Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 120-B, 447, 427, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-

¶42

(i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/(Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.

¶43

(ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶44

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission, till the disposal of the case.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

¶47

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74

H N Dayananda v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H N Dayananda v. State of Karnataka by

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

Smt. Latha Vs Sri. Bandhi Ningegowda

Gopala Vs State by Chikkamagalur Town Police

Sri P Venkatesh Vs Sri C K Prasad

Sri K S Muthappa Vs Sri a P Dharmappa

Veerendra M D Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Govind v Jathar Vs Smt.Bhavani S