- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29714 CRL.P No. 11766 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11766 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SMT. SULOCHANA W/O A.K. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 62, ARUNACHALAM MUDALIYER ROAD, NARAYANA PILLAI STREET, BHARATHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJESH A, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. GUFRAN SHARIFF S/O RIZWAN SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.17, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, MUDAMMA GARDEN, BENSON TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 046. 2. MR. MOHAMMED ALI S/O HAKH NAWAJ SHARIEF, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 9, E, 2ND CROSS ROAD, RESALE MARKET, SHIVJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 051. 3. STATE BY COMMERCIAL STREET POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29714 CRL.P No. 11766 of 2024 BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED UMMAR FAROOQ, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R3) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 483(3) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO 1) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.10.2024 PASSED IN CRL.MISC. NO.9234/2024 PASSED BY LEARNED LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59) AT BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner has preferred this petition praying to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to respondent Nos.2 and 3, by the Court of the LXIII Additional City Civil and Session Judge, Bengaluru City in Crl.Misc.No.9234/2024. 2. Heard and perused the material on record. 3. Petitioner along with her brothers and sisters claims to be the owner of the property bearing No.26, situated at Ibrahim Saheb Street, Shivajinagar, Bengaluru. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29714 CRL.P No. 11766 of 2024 It is averred that the said property is their ancestral property and accused named in the FIR have colluded with each other and executed a sale deed on 02.08.2024 and also a rectification deed and sold the property to respondent Nos.1 and 2 viz., accused Nos.8 and 9. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner/complainant that the accused have created false documents by entering into a criminal conspiracy and in furtherance of the same, accused Nos.1 to 5 have executed an agreement of sale dated 08.05.2024 in favour of accused Nos.6 and 7 and then, accused Nos.1 to 7 colluding with each other, executed sale deed on 02.08.2024 and rectification deed infavour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 i.e., accused Nos.8 and 9. 5. It is the contention of the learned counsel that there are civil suits pending between the parties and by supressing the material facts, the accused has obtained ad-interim-temporary injunction in O.S.No.3221/2024 and the said accused is absconding. He contended that there is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29714 CRL.P No. 11766 of 2024 a prima-facie against respondent Nos.1 and 2, the purchasers of the property in question and therefore, the learned Sessions Judge was not proper in granting anticipatory bail to them, as they are required for custodial interrogation. 6. FIR is registered in Crime No.153/2024 of Commercial Police Station, Bengaluru City, on 30.09.2024, on a complaint lodged by the petitioner Sri/Smt. Sulodchana against 9 accused persons, for offences Punishable under Section 190, 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023. 7. Petitioner has made several allegations which is a matter to be investigated into and established in due course. Admittedly, in respect of the property, civil suits are pending. 8. Learned Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail to respondent Nos.1 and 2 has made an observation that they appear to be the bonafide - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29714 CRL.P No. 11766 of 2024 purchasers of the property. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, by imposing conditions, the learned Sessions Judge has allowed the petition seeking anticipatory bail. It is not the case of the complainant or the State that the accused have violated any of the conditions imposed. It is also pertinent to note that accused Nos.6 and 7 who had approached this Court under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, were granted anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.11883/2023, vide order dated 06.12.2024. There are no compelling reasons made out to cancel the bail already granted. Hence, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21 CT: BHK