IN THE COURT OF THE ______ ADDL DISTRICT AND

SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,

BANGALORE

CRIMINAL MISC PETITION NO. ______ / 2022

IN CRIME NO. 131 /2022

BETWEEN

1. SRI. LALIT JAIN,

SON OF MR. TEJRAJ BANTIYA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

2. SRI. NIRMAL BANTIYA,

SON OF MR. TEJRAJ BANTIYA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

BOTH RESIDING AT No. 50 (30),

Yamuna Bai Road, Opp. E TV Office,
Madhavanagar, Bangalore North,
Bangalore 560001 ………PETITIONER

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Represented by Varthur Police Station
BANGALORE – 56000 ………RESPONDENT

APPLICATION U/S 438 CRPC FOR GRANT OF

ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED (Sri.
Lalit Jain & Sri. Nirmal Bantiya)
The Petitioners herein most respectfully submits as follows:

1. The address of the Petitioners for the purpose of service of

notice, summons, etc., of this Hon’ble Court is as shown in

the cause title. The Petitioners are also represented by their

counsels Smt. Aparna Kanampalli, M/s. Neyogi Law

Associates, No. 7, 4th cross, Malleswaram, Bangalore -560

003.

2. The address of the Respondent for the above said purposes

is as shown in the cause title.

3. This Petition has been filed by the Petitioners on the basis of

the Complaint made by L&T financial services and an FIR

has been registered against the petitioners, and the

petitioners are arrayed as A1 & A2 in the FIR No. 131/2022

dated 16.06.2022, in the limits of Varthur police station,

Bangalore city, under sections 406, 420 & 120B R/w Section

34 of IPC.
4. That according to the First Information Report, the

allegations levelled against the Petitioners are:

“That one Mr. Sridhar, the manager of L&T financial

services has filed the complaint against the

petitioners along with Mr. Rangaswamy the Builder

and the present purchaser of the Villa No. 10 (M/s.

Blue whale Machinery Technologies Pvt Ltd. Rep. by

Mr. Deepak Mehta) and the purchaser of villa no. 15

Mr. Shyam prasad. That the petitioners have taken a

housing loan for two villas amounting to Rs.

1,79,40,261-00 with respect to purchase of villas No.

10 & 15 respectively. It is further stated in the FIR

that the amount of loan taken by the Petitioners

have not been paid back to the Complainant.

Therefore, when the Complainant visited the villas

along with his team, Mr. Deepak Mishra has

displayed a Notice Board which says that the Villa

no. 10 belongs to him and further, Mr. Shyam Prasad

 & Ramya have issued a notice stating that villa no.

15 belongs to them.

It is further stated in the FIR that Mr. Rangaswamy

of M/s. BLR Ventures, have sold the said villas along

with many other villas and has taken loans from

various banks and has cheated banks and other

financial institutions, according to the Complaint

made.”

FACTS OF THE CASE

5. It is submitted that the Petitioners are Brothers by blood,

and the First Petitioner has purchased 2 Villa properties at

“CMRS Court yard Project” Varthur, Bangalore, in respect of

villa no. 10 & 15 for a consideration amount of Rs.

1,32,00,000-00 and 1,30,00,000-00 respectively. Further,

it is submitted that the 2nd Petitioner is only the co-applicant

with the said loan, and has been falsely implicated in the

said case.
6. The said villas were formed out of Sy. No. 163/2 & 163/3 of

converted land measuring 2 Acres 19 guntas, situated at

Varthur village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk.

7. Originally, the property belonged to Mrs. Yellamma, and

after her death, the property was transferred to the name of

Mr. Muniyappa, and his legal heirs.

8. The said Muniyappa along with his legal heirs, have issued a

registered General Power of Attorney in favour of M/s. BRL

Ventures Private Limited, represented by Chennam

Rangaswamy the accused no. 3 herein and Mrs. Lakshmi

Rangaswamy, along with M/s. BRL Ventures Private Limited,

represented by Chennam Rangaswamy the accused no. 3

herein and Mrs. Lakshmi Rangaswamy executed a tripatriate

agreement dated 09.06.2016 with the Petitioner No.1 for

purchase of Villa property No.10 & 15 respectively, while the

Accused no. 3 has allotted the properties in the name of

the Petitioner No.1.

9. It is not out of place to mention that the Petitioner no.1 has

paid a sum of Rs. 52,40,000-00 during the execution of

tripatriate agreement dated 09.06.2016 with M/s. BRL

Ventures Private Limited, represented by Chennam

Rangaswamy the accused no. 3 herein and Mrs. Lakshmi

Rangaswamy with respect to Villas no. 10 & 15 respectively.

10. Further, the Accused no. 3, has executed a Sale

agreement with respect of villa property No. 10 & 15 in

favour of Mr. Lalit Jain the Petitioner No.1 herein, wherein a

stamp duty of Rs. 13200 has been paid on the said

agreement on 10.06.2016 and further a stamp duty of Rs.

13000 has been paid for the villa property No. 15

respectively.

11. Further, the Petitioner no.1 has applied for a home loan

with the Complainant, M/s. L & T Financial Services Limited,

and the sanctioned loan was Rs. 97,00,000-00 for one villa

and Rs. 99,00,000 for the other villa; while the Disbursed

loan amount of Rs. 80,81,000-00 and 82,39,209-00

respectively
12. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 1,63,20,587-00 was disbursed to

the account M/s. BRL Ventures Private Limited represented

by Mrs. Lakshmi Rangaswamy & Chennam Rangaswamy the

accused no. 3 herein.

13. The Petitioner No.1 is paying EMIs to M/s. L & T Financial

Services Limited regularly, except during covid, because of

financial crisis all over the world.

14. Further, it is stated that the terms of the sale agreement

executed between M/s. BRL Ventures Private Limited and

the petitioner no.1 states that the petitioner no.1 has to pay

a sum of Rs. 5 lacs as Booking amount, and 20% at the

time of sale agreement including the booking amount, 35%

after the completion of foundation, 10% after completion of

ground floor slab, and 15% after the completion of First

floor slab; 10% after completing flooring; 5% at the time of

registration and 5% at the time of possession.

15. The Petitioner No.1 has paid a sum of Rs. 31,89,937-00 as

EMIs towards Villa No. 10 as of today; while a sum of Rs.

 28,90,535-00 was paid towards Villa no. 15 respectively.

Therefore, a total amount of Rs. 60,80,472-00 towards the

loan to M/s. L & T Financial Services Private Limited.

16. The Petitioner no. 1 would like to bring it to the notice of

the court that whatever, the amounts being released by the

Complainant was released directly to the name of the

Accused no.3 and neither the Petitioner no.1 nor the

petitioner no.2 had no intention of cheating the

Complainant, nor has got wrongful gains from the said loan.

17. The Accused no.3 has not put the Petitioners into

possession of the Villa properties no. 10 & 13 respectively at

any point of time, and till date they are not in possession of

the property.

18. It is further stated that the petitioners have time and

again requested the Accused no.3, the Builder, to register

the sale deed in the name of the Petitioners and to handover

possession of the property, But, the Accused no.3,

threatened the Petitioners of dire consequences, and

 threatened that he would trouble even their families if they

try to file any complaint against him.

19. The Petitioners are peace loving, and pious people, who

have good reputation in the society, and fearing that any

type of ruckus may spoil their reputation, did not file any

case against the Accused No.3.

20. Further, the Accused No.3 have promised to return their

money at his convenience, if they abstain from filing any

cases against the Accused No.3.

21. The Petitioners state that actually para 3 of the Complaint

states that, the petitioners have not paid their loan amount

properly, But; whereas in the FIR, the Respondent has

misrepresented and misquoted the Complaint stating that

the Petitioners have not at all repaid the loan amount, which

is false, and that the petitioners have annexed their bank

statement in support of their payment.

22. Further, the Complainant in the Complaint states that A3

Mr. Rangaswamy was responsible for selling the Said villas

to various persons, and that he has availed loans in the

same way and has cheated many financial institutions and

banks. But the Respondent failed to properly investigate the

matter and they have falsely implicated the petitioners in

this case, while they should have arrayed the Accused no. 3

as Accused No.1, who is mainly and solely responsible for

cheating the public for their money and has swindled lot of

money from many innocent people like that of the

petitioners.

GROUNDS

23. That the present FIR has been registered on false and

improper facts. The facts stated in the FIR are fabricated,

concocted and without any basis.

24. That the police has falsely implicated the Petitioners in the

present case, the Petitioners are respectable citizen of the

society and are not involved in any criminal case or activity

25. That the facts stated by the complainant in the complaint

against the Petitioner are civil disputes and does not

constitute any criminal offence at all.

26. That the Petitioners are falsely implicated in the aforesaid

case; and that the petitioner is not required in any kind of

investigation nor any kind of custodial interrogation is

required.

27. That the Petitioner is having very good antecedents, and

that they belonged to good family background and there is

no criminal cases pending against them. and they were

never convicted previously in any other offence.

28. That the Petitioner is a permanent resident and there are

no chances of the petitioners absconding from the course of

justice.

29. That the Petitioner undertakes to present himself before

the police/court as and when directed.

30. That the Petitioner undertakes that he will not, directly or

indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any

person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to

any police officer.

31. That the Petitioner further undertakes not to tamper with

the evidence or the witnesses in any manner.

32. The petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged

by the prosecution. That the Petitioner is ready and willing

to accept any other conditions as may be imposed by the

Court in connection with the case.

33. That the Petitioner will not misuse the bail in future if they

are granted bail. That the petitioners are ready to furnish

the sureties of reasonable amount if he is released on bail.

34. That any other anticipatory bail Petition is not pending in

any Court against the same FIR before any other court

except for the present bail application.

 PRAYER

1. WHEREFORE, the Petitioners most respectfully prays that

this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant Anticipatory
Bail to the Petitioners and direct the Respondent police not
to arrest the petitioners.

2. Further, it is prayed that the court may direct the release

of the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the
Respondent police in respect of the offences in Crime No.
131/2022 initiated on the file of Varthur Police Station in
the interest of Justice & Equity

3. Any other order which the court may deem fit and proper
in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be
passed in favour of the Petitioners.

PETITIONER

THROUGH
COUNSEL