The court reinforced that anticipatory bail cannot be granted when prima facie evidence shows violations of property rights under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

JUDGMENT :

G. BASAVARAJA, J.

1. In this appeal appellant is challenging the order dated 19^th September, 2025 passed in Criminal Misc.No.1524 of 2025 by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore (for short "the trial Court").

2. Facts in brief are that Anekal Police laid charge sheet against accused 1 and 2 and others for commission of offences punishable under Sections 336 (2), 338, 34092), 318(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3) read with Section 3 (5) of Indian Penal Code and submitted First Information Report to the Court. Accused 1 and 2, the appellants herein, have filed application under Section 482 of BNSS -2023 seeking anticipatory bail. Same came to be rejected by the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection of anticipatory bail, the appellants have preferred this appeal.

3. Respondent No.2 appeared before the court through Counsel and filed statement of objections contending that the application filed by the appellant is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is stated that on 17^th March, 2021, registered General Power of Attorney was said to have been executed by respondent No.2 and family members in favour of appellant No.1. Upon coming to know that the appellant No.1 is misusing the GPA, the respondent No.2 issued legal notice dated 06^th June 2022 to the appellant No.1 for cancellation of GPA dated 17^th March, 2021 and directed the appellant No.1 not to do any further transaction through the said GPA. The second respondent issued public notice through "Hosa Diganta" Kannada Daily, regarding cancellation of GPA dated 17^th March, 2021. On 15^th February, 2022, the second respondent and his family members cancelled the GPA dated 17^th March, 2021 through registered cancellation of GPA. On 8^th April, 2022, respondent No.2 lodged complaint before the respondent No.1- Police station against appellants regarding forgery, cheating and misusing of the said GPA. The said case was registered in Crime No.92 of 2005. After obtaining bail from the court for crime registered in Crime No.92 of 2025, again, the appellant No.1 executed registered sale deed in favour of applicant No.2 by fabricating the documents pertaining to property belonging to respondent No.2 and his family members saying that appellant No.1 is the GPA holder. The respondent No.2 on 7^th July, 2025 when he an his friends Suresh and Muniraju were at his land, appellants 1 and 2 arrived with their associates and the appellants, with their friends, allegedly abused respondent No.2 in filthy language and humiliated by taking his caste name. The accused also allegedly threatened to beat him and warned him that they know how to deal with his family members one by one. The appellants alleged warned to kill him and his family mebmers and bury them on the spot, if he returned to the land. It is further stated that respondent No.2 and his family owns eight acres of land in Bagganadoddi village which was granted to his father on 11^th October, 1966 and is protected under Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands Act. The family belongs to Adi Karnataka Scheduled Caste, had appointed appellant No.1 as a GPA holder to manager revenue and court related matters. However, due to business disagreements, the family revoked the GPA on 15^th March, 2023. Despite that the appellant No.1 allegedly created a fraudulent agreement with appellant No.2 on 23^rd August, 2024. Hence, the 2^nd respondent had filed complaint on 08^th April, 2025. It is further stated that the appellants have created documents such as Agreement of sale dated 23^rd August, 2024 and sale deed dated 04^t