- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103776 OF 2024 (438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103816 OF 2024 IN CRL.P.NO.103776/2024: BETWEEN: 1. SANJAY S/O. RAJU NADUVINAMANI, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. HULAGINAKATTI, TUMARIKOPPA, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. MANJUNATH S/O. RAMANNA KORASAR @ MANJUNATH MAKADAWALE, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. #56, LAKSHMISINGANAKERI, MALAMADDI, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI S.B.DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA (PSI VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI) REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, KALABURGI. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN VIDYANAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.153/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) COURT, HUBBALLI, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 419, 420, 465, 468 AND 471 OF IPC 1860. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.21 14:32:51 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 IN CRL.P.NO.103816/2024: BETWEEN: 1. PHILOMEN GOTTEMUKKALA AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SURY NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, SHANTINAGAR, SULLA ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580030. 2. SUNDAR PAUL S/O. PHILOMEN GOTTEMUKKALA, AGE: 28 YEARS OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SURY NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, SHANTINAGAR, SULLA ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580030. 3. CHANDRU PAUL S/O. PHILOMEN GOTTEMUKKALA, AGE: 28 YEARS OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SURY NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, SHANTINAGAR, SULLA ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580030. (ACCUSED NO. 4 TO 6 IN VIDYANAGAR PS CRIME NO 153/2024) … PETITIONERS (BY SRI S.B.DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (PSI VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI), REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580011. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.4 TO 6 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN VIDYANAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.153/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF 1ST ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) COURT HUBBALLI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 419, 420, 465, 468 AND 471 OF IPC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) Crl.P.no.103776/2024 is filed by accused no.2 and 3, while, Crl.P.no.103816/2024 is filed by accused no.4 to 6. They are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’ for short) for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime no.153/2024 of Vidyanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short). 2. Sri S.B. Doddagoudar, learned counsel for petitioners submitted, based on complaint filed by Smt.Sushila Shivappa Hulkoti, Crime no.153/2024 was registered by Vidyanagar Police Station on 11.11.2024 against petitioners for offences mentioned above. In complaint, it was alleged, complainant, her brothers Sangappa and Ashok were children of Gurusiddappa Malagi, who owned ancestral joint family property i.e. land bearing Sy.no.105/2 measuring 11 Acres 35 Guntas of Mantur village, which they succeeded to on death of their father on 01.06.1993. And on 10.06.1997, complainant had executed relinquished deed in respect of same in favour of her brothers, on bond paper of Rs.10. And further that, about - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 one month prior to complaint, her brother Ashok Malagi visited her house and informed that said property would be sold in favour of Vinodkumar Jain, Lalita Paramar and Chetan Paravapur for total sale consideration of 12 Crores, which deal was mediated by accused no.2 and 3. But, out of total consideration, only Rs.2 Crores 30 Lakhs was paid and payment of remaining amount was being deferred. And when on her instructions, her son Basavaraj obtained certified copies of all deeds relating to transaction, she noticed registration of relinquishment deed on 24.07.2023 as if executed by complainant in favour of her brothers, by impersonation. On enquiry, when her brothers expressed ignorance, she realized about cheating by fabrication of deed, forgery, impersonation and relying on fabricated deed while execution of sale deed by complainant’s brothers. Based on said complaint, Crime no.153/2024 was registered by Vidyanagar Police Station for above said offences. 3. It was submitted, contents of complaint would indicate entire allegation would fall within ambit of ‘civil dispute’, and instead of complainant approaching Civil Court for appropriate remedy, had sought to abuse process of Court. It - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 was submitted, entire transaction was very well within knowledge of complainant’s brothers and any irregularity or illegality would be at their instance as they would as only brothers of complainant would stand to benefit from relinquishment deed. 4. It was submitted fact that no overt acts were alleged against petitioners nor any complaint filed against her brothers though it was at their behest would indicate that petitioners were being falsely implicated, especially when relinquishment deed was executed prior to sale deed. 5. Insofar as petitioners in Crl.P.103816/2024, it was submitted, accused no.5 and 6 were implicated merely because they were children of accused no.4, who himself had only acted as witness to sale deed. Therefore, it was evident none of petitioners had committed any offence as alleged and were innocent, law abiding citizens, with respectful reputation. But, as provisions invoked in complaint were non-bailable, they were under apprehension of being arrested, which if permitted, would tarnish their image. It was further submitted they had no criminal antecedents and undertook not only to co-operate for investigation but also abide by any conditions for granting bail. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 6. On above grounds, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP for respondent - State opposed petitions. It was submitted, offences alleged in complaint are forgery, cheating, fabrication of documents and impersonation, which were serious offences. It was submitted, complainant had specifically stated petitioners had created documents in collusion with an imposter (woman). As investigation was under progress, if petitioners were granted bail, they would tamper with prosecution witnesses and hamper investigation. On above grounds sought dismissal of petitions. 8. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record. 9. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail with conditions?” 10. In these petitions, petitioners (accused no.2 to 6) are seeking for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in view of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 Crime no.153/2024 by Vidyanagar Police Station for non- bailable offences as stated above. 11. Indeed, offences alleged to have been committed by petitioners appear severe, there is no disputing fact that even according to complainant/prosecution that they were in midst of sale transaction between parties, thereby there would be some substance in submission of learned counsel for petitioners that it is perhaps case of civil dispute between parties. However, a finding on same would be beyond purview of these petitions. 12. Prima facie examination of prosecution material up to this stage would not indicate any grave or incriminating material against any of petitioners, except general allegations against all accused. Petitioners have stated to be permanently residing at respective places with their families within Dharwad District and holding movable and immovable properties therein. Indeed, accused no.5 and 6 appear to have been arraigned for no other reason than that they are children of accused no.4, while accused no.4 is only one of witnesses to sale deed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 13. Besides, none do not bear criminal antecedents. And concerns expressed by prosecution about possibility of petitioners fleeing justice, tampering witnesses/evidence and hampering investigation, etc., could be overcome by imposing appropriate conditions. 14. Point for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, following: ORDER Petitions are allowed. It is ordered that petitioners/accused no.2 to 6 shall be enlarged on bail, in case of their arrest in Crime no.153/2024 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Hubballi for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC, subject to following conditions: a) Petitioners shall appear before Investigating Officer, within 15 days from date of this order and each of them shall execute personal bonds for sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for likesum. b) They shall appear before Investigating Officer for purpose of investigation as and when required and co-operate with investigation. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:823 CRL.P No. 103776 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103816 of 2024 c) They shall not threaten, tamper with or influence prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly. d) They shall not leave jurisdiction of Dharwad District without prior permission, until completion of investigation/filing of Charge sheet. e) They shall not indulge in any criminal activities. f) Accused no.2 and 3 shall mark their attendance before Investigating Officer between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm on every alternate Saturday, until filing of charge sheet. g) It is clarified that all observations herein would be prima facie, for purposes of this order only. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE EM/RH CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 15