Allowed

Sri Nagaraju K M v. State by Chintamani Town Police

Karnataka HC21 Jan 2026CRL.P/15965/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS for alleged insertion of properties in a sale deed. The High Court, noting the offence is not punishable by life imprisonment and the petitioners offered cooperation, allowed the petition subject to specific conditions including bail bond and appearance schedules.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioners ordered released on bail upon arrest subject to conditions including bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/-, cooperation in investigation, and periodic appearances.

Sri Nagaraju K M Vs State by Chintamani… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15965 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI NAGARAJU K M AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, R/AT KADISHANAHALLI VILLAGE, ULLAPPANAHALLI POST, AMBAJIDURGA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 563 125.

¶9

SRI RAMESH K M, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.109, BTS MAIN ROAD, NARAYANAPURA ADUGODI, BANGALORE-560 030.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. K.S. NARESH SANTHOSH, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE BY CHINTAMANI TOWN POLICE CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THE SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. (BY SRI. MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL.SPP)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO SECURE THE RECORDS IN CR.NO.193/2025 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, AT CHINTAMANI, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, GRANT PETITIONERS ANTICIPATORY BAIL DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT CHINTAMANI TOWN TO RELEASE THEM ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 61(1)(a), 318(4), 319(2), 318(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338 OF BNS, 2023, IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.193/2025 OF THEIR FILE AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 under

¶24

Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.193/2025 of Chintamani Town Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61(1)(a), 318(4), 319(2), 318(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and

¶26

the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

The learned counsel for petitioner would

¶30

contend that the complainant, his wife and mother have executed a registered sale deed in favour of petitioner No.1/accused No.1 on 25.09.2025. In spite of the same, the complainant is making allegations regarding the insertion of two other properties. The complainant and two others, after fully understanding the contents of the said sale deed, affixed their signatures at the office of the SubRegistrar. The petitioners have paid the entire sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners are ready to cooperate with the police in investigation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

¶31

Per contra, the learned Additional State Public

¶32

Prosecutor for the respondent/State would contend that the payment of stamp duty of Rs.24,800/- itself indicates

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

that it is 1% of the value of the property sold, and that as

¶37

per the sale deed, the total sale consideration is Rs.12,40,000/-, which constitutes 50% of the valuation. This itself indicates that two properties were inserted in the sale deed which were not agreed to be sold by the complainant, his wife, and his mother. The matter requires custodial interrogation of the petitioners. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

¶38

Having heard the learned counsel, the Court

¶39

has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

¶40

The complainant, his wife and mother have executed a sale deed dated 25.09.2025 in favour of petitioner No.1/accused No.1. It is alleged in the complaint that the sale was agreed only in respect of 14 guntas of land, and that two other properties were inserted in the sale deed without the knowledge of the complainant, his wife and mother. The consideration paid is also not fully

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

received by the complainant. The said sale deed executed by complainant and two others is a registered sale deed. The case of complainant is based on documents. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners

¶44

have undertaken to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. There are no criminal incidents of the petitioners.

¶45

7. Considering the above aspects, the petitioners

¶46

have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions.

¶47

In the result, the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

i) The petition is allowed.

¶50

ii) The petitioners are ordered to be released on

¶51

bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.193/2025 of Chintamani Town Police Station registered for the offences

¶52

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

punishable under Sections 61(1)(a), 318(4), 319(2), 318(2), , 336(3), 338 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 subject to following conditions.

¶55

a) The petitioners shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶56

b) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called for and cooperate for investigation.

¶57

c) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶58

¶59

NC: 2026:KHC:3303 CRL.P No. 15965 of 2025

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

d) The petitioner shall appear before the

¶62

Investigating Officer on first and third Sunday of

¶63

month for two months or till filing of final report

¶64

which ever is earlier.

¶65

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶66

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Sri Nagaraju K M v. State by Chintamani Town Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nagaraju K M v. State by Chintamani Town Police

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 Reefas @ Rifas K Vs the State of Karnataka

Divya J Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Venkatesh, Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Abubakar Siddique Vs State of Karnataka

Nithin Kumar Vs State of Karnataka by

Shri K K Abdulla Kunhi Vs State by