Allowed

Shivanna v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Aug 2024CRL.P/5779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.2 sought anticipatory bail in a forgery and criminal breach of trust case arising from a disputed property sale; the petition against accused No.1 was dismissed as not pressed after his apprehension. The court granted anticipatory bail to accused No.2 with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail ordered; petitioner to appear before IO within 15 days and furnish Rs.2,00,000 bond with two sureties, subject to specified conditions.

Shivanna Vs State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5779 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHIVANNA S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT NO.28 RING ROAD 1^ST CROSS, KENGUNTE OPPOSITE AMBEDKAR COLLEGE, MALLATHAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 056

¶9

Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: high court of karnataka

¶10

VEERABHADRAPPA S/O LATE VEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS R/AT NO.15, 10^TH CROSS NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE MALLATTHAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 056.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY JNANABHARATHI POLICE REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE I.E., JNANABARATHI POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶19

THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.202/2024, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 34, 120B, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 4^TH ADDL. CMM, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.202 of 2024 of Jnanabharathi Police Station, pending on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant G Venkatesh.

¶24

Heard Sri Nagaiah, learned counsel for the

¶25

petitioner and Smt N Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶27

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

¶28

learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

R E A S O N S

¶32

The petitioner being accused No.2 is seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. The complainant has filed the first information against accused Nos.1 to 3 making allegations for having committed the offences as stated above. It is the contention of the complainant that he had purchased the property from the brother of accused No.1, which was later gifted by accused No.2 in favour of accused No.1, who in turn, sold it to accused No.3. But it is the contention of the petitioner that the property in question is a family property and the suit for partition was filed by accused No.2 in OS No.8223 of 2010 and

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶34

the same came to be decreed as per judgment and decree dated 01.10.2015. It was only thereafter, he had gifted the property in favour of accused No.1 who in turn sold to accused No.3. Considering the contention taken by the petitioner, I find considerable force in the submission.

¶35

It is stated that petitioner - accused No.1 was apprehended during the pendency of this petition and is already enlarged on bail. Hence, the petition against petitioner - accused No.1 was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 25.07.2024. It is stated that even though the petitioner is shown as a rowdysheeter for having 4 criminal cases, he is already enlarged bail in all those cases. Moreover considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶36

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

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petition is allowed.

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶40

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest Crime No.202 of 2024 of Jnanabharathi Police Station, pending on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶41

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on his appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge him on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶42

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

¶43

b. The petitioner shall not commit similar offences;

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by him.

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:30703 CRL.P No. 5779 of 2024

¶49

On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to

¶50

accept the sureties within a reasonable time.

¶51

Sd/(M G UMA) JUDGE

¶52

*bgn/CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1

Shivanna v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivanna 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

Sri Sanmathi Vs Sri Puttaswamy @ Puttaswamappa

State of Karnataka Vs Manwar Hussain Majumdar

D M Nagarajasetty Vs Smt Vasundara Radha

Sri M R Prasanna Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S Ramachandra Reddy Vs Sri Asadulla

Sri.L.C.Dayananda Vs Smt.P.S.Vani