LAWS(KAR)-2013-11-414

RATHNAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On November 08, 2013
RATHNAMMA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No. 96/13, on the file of the respondent/Police registered for the offences under Sections 419, 468, 471, 420 of IPC, is before this Court praying for grant of anticipatory bail. The respondent/Police, on the basis of the private complaint filed by one Chandrashekar S/o Nagaraju, a resident of Nadanahally village, T. Narasipura Road, Mysore Taluk, which has been referred to them for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., have registered the above case against the petitioner and have taken up investigation. It is alleged among other things in the complaint, the complainant's grandmother Gundamma had owned a house bearing 56/51 situated in 1st Cross, Bhujangeshwara Extension of Chamarajanagara Town and the said house was let out to the petitioner -accused on rent. Later, due to illness, Gundamma died. Taking advantage of death of Gundamma, the present petitioner -accused pretending as if she is the daughter of Gundamma clandestinely transferred the house which was in the name of Gundamma in her name by fabricating the documents and thereby she has committed the aforementioned offences.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner has not committed any offence. He further submits the petitioner is a lady. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 419, 468, 471, 420 of IPC. Except for the offence u/S. 420 of IPC, the rest of the offences are not punishable with extreme penalties. In the circumstances, the petitioner be granted anticipatory bail.

(3.) HAVING regard to the offences alleged, the background in which the occurrence has taken place, as the allegations reveal that this petitioner had taken care of the grand mother of the complainant cordially while she was not keeping good health in her last days and taking into consideration she being a lady by virtue of Proviso to Section 437 of Cr.P.C., I do not find any justification to decline the request of the petitioner. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: