CRL.P/10240/2017 of JAYAPAL REDDY Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 28 December 2017

ORDER

Tne complaint pertains to a nouse property bearingNo.1535, Khata No.6/74/1535/669 of Kengeri Upanagar,Bangalore, which was sold to the complainant and his wife|DYaccusedNo.1-Manjula,representingas|ownersupported by her husband Shivakumar-Accused No.2 andOne|Udayasnankar-AccusedNo.3|foravaluableconsideration of Rs.57,50,000/- under a registered sale.deed dated 10.8.2016. Tne complaint reveals that the)complainantpressurizedfor.producingtheoriginaldocuments. However, it was represented tnat it was lost)and the accused persons also executed an agreement to.give the documents if they are found. Thus, the)complainant was inducted into the possession of the)property. However, the officials of the Kotak MahindraBank came and ceased the house and thereafter, it wasrevealed tnat during 2006, the erstwhile owners Smt.|Roopa and Ganesh had raised loan from their bank,|

suppressing the same, by executing registered power of.attorney in favour of one H. Ramesh, they had sold the)property to the petitioner and the petitioner in turn nas)sold the same to Manjula-accused No.1 from whom the)complainant had purchased the property. Under the.circumstances, it is tne case wherein the prosecution|claims that the purchaser was cheated suppressing the factof encumbrance thereby the bank officials have seized the|property.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits tnatthe complainant has twisted the civil case into the present|One and that accused No.1 nas already been released on)Dall.

3. Learned HCGP submits that innocent purcnaser nas been victimized by the accused persons and as such)tne petitioner is not entitled for grant of Dail.

4Tne mortgage is said to nave taken placeduring the year 2006. The petitioner is said to nave sold)

the property on 17.11.2011. Hence, in the facts andcircumstances of the case, tne petitioner is entitied to be)enlarged on anticipatory bail.

5. Tne petition is allowed. Tne petitioner isordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest InconnectionwitnCr.No.339/201/7of.KengerlP.S.,|Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 420,read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following.conditions:

i)Tne petitioner snail execute a personal bond for asum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs Only) withone surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of theInvestigating Officer.

ii)Ine petitioner-accused snail not terrorize thewitnesses nor tamper the prosecution evidence in anyManne [.

ili) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of theCourt below until further orders by the trial Court.

) 73&=��: '30$ 0"%��: 2"3) $& 3–3 )(���������!�����

0 ")'0 '30$ 0&'��:��

*alb/-.

�����������