Sri M Muniswamy Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI M MUNISWAMY S/O. LATE MUNIHANUMAPPA. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O. NO.5, 1^ST MAIN, 1^ST CROSS, NAGASHETTY HALLI BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT, RMV 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 094

¶10

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

SMT. M. MAMATHA W/O LATE DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O. NO.5 1^ST MAIN, 1^ST CROSS, NAGASHETTY HALLI

¶12

BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT, RMV 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 094

¶13

(BY SRI. HARISH N.R.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CCB POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

BENGALURU-560 001.

¶21

SRI. SREERAMESH B L, S/O T N LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT #F-1, BRINDAVANA APARTMENT, PATELAPPA LAYOUT, NEAR RAILWAY GATE, NAGASHEETY HALLI, SANJAYANAGAR POST, RMV EXTESNION, II STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 094. AMENDED AND IMPLEADED V.C.O DATED 09.03.2026

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR N K., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SMT. ANITHA GIRISH.N., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1)

¶24

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT/CCB POLICE, BENGALURU CITY TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN RESPECT OF CR.NO.2/2026, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 189(1),336(2),336(3),340(2),318(4),61(2),190 R/W SECTION.190 OF BNS, 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED I ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY, BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 4 are before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.2/2026 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 189(1), 318(4), 336(2), 61(2), 336(3), and 340(2) r/w 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶32

Brief facts of the case:

¶33

The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint

¶34

came to be registered by the complainant stating that a property was purchased on 16.07.2008 under the registered sale deed from Arun Jerald Lobo. From the date of purchase of the said property, the family of the complainant has been in possession of the said property. On 02.07.2014, it is stated that he had executed gift deed and the same has been duly registered. The donee namely, Dr.Tejashwini Gowda executed gift deed in favour of her brother namely, M.Nanjegowda. Such being the fact, it is alleged that the present petitioners and others in

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

order to knock off the property, created a fabricated partition deed and got changed the revenue records.

¶39

Heard Sri.Harish N.R., learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Anitha Girish N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri.Praveen Kumar N.K., learned counsel for de-facto complainant.

¶40

It is the submission of the learned counsel for

¶41

the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence, they have been falsely implicated in this case. The entire allegations are made against accused No.1. However, he has been enlarged on bail by the trial Court. The accused No.1 has filed a civil suit in OS.No.6903/2025 pending before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. The entire case is based on civil dispute. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. They will abide the

¶42

5 -

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

conditions imposed by this Court. Making such

¶46

submissions, he prays to allow the petition.

¶47

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State vehemently submitted that the manner in which the petitioners and others have committed the offence would indicate the clear intention of deceiving the complainant and his family members. The allegations against the petitioners that they have created a fabricated and false partition deed and sold the property to other members. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the present petitioners are very much necessary. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant them bail. Making such submissions, he prays to reject the petition.

¶48

Similarly, the learned counsel for de-facto complainant who assisted the prosecution has also endorsed the submission of the learned HCGP for State.

¶49

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. The present petitioners are arraigned as accused

¶50

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

Nos.3 and 4 and the allegation is that all the accused persons in furtherance of common intention to deceive the complainant and others, created fabricated documents and

¶53

got the revenue records changed in order to gain unlawfully. As such, a complaint came to be registered against the petitioners and others.

¶54

It is noticed that accused No.1 has been

¶55

enlarged on bail by the trial Court. Considering the said aspect, it is appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶56

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶57

ORDER

¶58

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶59

(ii) The petitioners are ordered to be

¶60

enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest

¶61

in Crime No.2/2026 of respondent-police for

¶62

the offence under Sections 189(1), 318(4),

¶63

7 -

¶64

NC: 2026:KHC:14082 CRL.P No. 2937 of 2026

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

336(2), 61(2), 336(3), and 340(2) r/w 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶67

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before

¶68

the jurisdictional police within a period of one month from today to execute personal bond and also to furnish surety.

¶69

(iv) The petitioners shall co-operate with investigation till filing of the charge sheet.

¶70

(v) The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

¶71

(vi) The petitioners shall appear before

¶72

the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.