Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of evidence tampering concerns and the nature of allegations suggesting a civil dispute rather than a criminal offense.

Order :

1. This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.359/2023 registered at Police Station Luni, Jodhpur City West, for the offences under Sections 447 and 379 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution, complainant is having a residential plot measuring 7179.5 sq.ft. in Village Kankani, Tehsil Luni which was purchased by him through public E-auction held by Punjab National Bank on 28.10.2021. On issue of sale certificate by the Punjab National Bank, the Sub- Registrar, Luni has registered the said piece of land in favour of the present petitioner.

3. As per the prosecution, on 04.12.2023 when the complainant visited the aforesaid plot with his wife (Preeti Lodha), they saw that the present petitioner alongwith 4-5 persons was demolishing the wall of the plot. When he requested the petitioner not to do so, he started punching him and told him to run away from the place or else, he will be killed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. A matter which is purely of civil nature, has been given criminal colour by the complainant. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that prior to lodging of the present FIR, the complainant- Aditya Lodha preferred S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7253/2023 “Aditya Lodha v. Punjab National Bank & Ors.” before the co-ordinate Bench of this Court alleging inter alia that he has not been handed over the physical possession of the immovable property despite he having deposited the entire bid amount with the bank.

5. The Writ Petition No.7253/2023 “Aditya Lodha v. Punjab National Bank & Ors.” was withdrawn by the complainant on 07.01.2025 without giving any specific reason.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner instead of filing civil/revenue suit to settle his land disputes with Punjab National Bank or with the accused- petitioner, if any, has wrongly launched criminal case against the petitioner.

7. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, learned counsel contended that the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are triable by the Court of First Class Magistrate. The accused-petitioner is a permanent resident of Jodhpur and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the evidence. Learned counsel further submitted that pursuant to the interim order dated 01.10.2024 passed by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner has already joined the investigation and therefore, the custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not at all necessitated in the present case. On these grounds, learned counsel implored the Court to grant indulgence of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of the accusations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be released on anticipatory bail. However, learned counsels were not in a position to dispute the fact that prior to filing of the present FIR, the complainant had preferred a Writ Petition No.7253/2023 “Aditya Lodha v. Punjab National Bank &Ors.” before this Hon’ble Court praying for the following reliefs:-

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

i. The entire auction proceeding undertaken by the respondent bank may kindly be quashed and set aside being in violation of lawa as well as of Principle of Fair Play and Natural Justice.

ii. Consequently, the Sale Certificate (Annexure – 3), the Registration of Sale Certificate (Annexure- 4) may also kindly be quashed and set aside on being declared as void ab initio.

Iii. The respondent bank be directed to refund t