1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 100796 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

Gururaj

S/o Krishnamurthy @ Krishna Hallur

Aged about 47 years

Occ: Agriculture and Private Job

R/o Flat No.E/11/12, Platinum City

No.2, HMT Watch Factory Road

Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore 3 560 022.

&Petitioner

(By Sri. Phaniraj Kashyap, Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka

By Kushtagi Police Station

Koppal District

Represented by SPP

High Court of Karnataka

Dharwad-580 011.

...Respondent

(By Sri. P.M. Banakar, Addl. SPP)

This Criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. praying to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner /

2

accused No.2 in the Crime No.266/2020 of Kushtagi Police

Station, registered before Respondent police for the offence

punishable under Sections 193, 200, 209, 199, 406, 420,

210, 196, 418, 191, 426, 405, 192, 417 and 447 of the IPC

based on direction given in PCR No.93/2020 on the file of

Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.,) & JMFC Kushtagi.

This Criminal Petition pertaining to Dharwad Bench

coming on for orders at Bengaluru Bench, this day, the

court made the following:

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner- Accused No.2

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail in

Crime No.266/2020 registered by the Kushtagi Police

Station for the offences punishable under Sections, 193,

200, 209, 199, 406, 420, 210, 196, 418, 191, 426, 405,

192, 417 and 447 of IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned Addl.SPP and perused the records.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on a private

complaint filed by one Anantha Kandakura before the

3

Magistrate under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. the same was

referred to police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. After

registering the complaint, the police issued FIR and

thereafter the police are making hectic efforts to arrest this

petitioner. The petitioner approached the Sessions Judge

for grant of anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected on

25.02.2021. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that

the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has

been falsely implicated in the case. Even though the joint

development agreement was entered between the parties,

the complainant gave Rs.5 lakhs and the same is already

returned to the complainant. A suit was filed by the brother

of the petitioner which came to be ended in a compromise

before the Civil Court. The same was challenged by the

complainant. There is no material to show that this

petitioner intentionally created the document to cheat the

complainant. The petitioner is ready to abide by the

4

conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence,

prayed for granting anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned Addl.SPP seriously objected for

granting anticipatory to the petitioner and prayed for

dismissal of the petition.

6. Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of

records, though the complainant has mentioned various

provisions of IPC and Cr.P.C., the offence under 420 and

406 of IPC are non-bailable offence and other offences are

bailable offences. The investigation is still under progress.

The allegation goes to show that there is a civil transaction

and in this regard, Joint Development Agreement has been

entered between the complainant and the accused. The

agreement is also produced. If at all the agreement is not

performed by anyone of the parties, remedy is available to

the complainant to file civil suit. Even if the accused in

collusion with other accused persons has filed any suit and

compromised the suit and obtained fraudulent decree, the

complainant has to file an appeal and see that the decree is

5

set-aside. Only on the basis of judgment or finding given by

the Civil Judge in respect of fraudulent decr