logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 519 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Karnataka (Circuit Bench At Dharwad)
Case No : Criminal Petition No.100907 Of 2026 (438 CR.P.C./482 BNSS)
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
Parties : Kisan Versus The State Of Karnataka, Rep. By SPP, Dharwad
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: D.B. Karigar, Advocate. For the Respondent: Keertilata R. Patil, HCGP.
Date of Judgment : 07-05-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC-D 6513,
Summary :-
Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
- Section 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Catch Words:
- Anticipatory bail
- Criminal conspiracy
- Bail conditions

Summary:
The petitioner, accused No.2, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, invoking Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No. 60/2026. The FIR alleges a criminal conspiracy wherein the accused allegedly promised to double a sum of Rs 34 lakh but failed to do so, leading to the complainant’s loss. The petitioner contended that the complaint’s averments were false and that no offence was committed. The State opposed the bail. After reviewing the complaint and FIR, the Court, without passing on the merits, granted anticipatory bail subject to several conditions, including personal bond, surety, attendance requirements, and non‑tampering with witnesses. The order also directed that any breach of conditions could lead to bail cancellation.

Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973), praying to Grant Anticipatory Bail and thereby direct the respondent not to arrest the petitioner as there is likelihood of arrest of the petitioner/accused No.2, in Mudhol P.S. Crime No.60/2026, dated 03.03.2026, pending before Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol, registered for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in the ends of justice.)

Oral Order

1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) praying to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.2 on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.60/2026 of Mudhol P.S., pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol, registered for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, by allowing this criminal petition.

2. It is the brief case of prosecution as per the FIR and complaint averments that the accused persons have made criminal conspiracy and made to believe the complainant that they would double the amount. Accordingly received an amount of thirty-four lakh, but without giving the amount in double and in the process of escaping with money, they have chased and apprehended one person and a car and others ran away. Therefore, with these allegations the alleged complaint is lodged before the police and a crime was registered and offences are foisted against the accused persons as stated above.

3. Heard the arguments of Sri D.B.Karigar, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt.Keertilata R. Patil, learned HCGP for the respondent State and perused the material placed before the Court.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.2 submitted that the entire compliant averments are false and it is also unbelievable that the amount would be doubled within few days. Therefore, no prudent man can believe that the amount would be doubled in few days and the petitioner has not committed any offence. Hence, prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned HCGP vehemently opposes for grant of bail and prays to reject petition.

6. Upon considering the averments made in the complaint and FIR the allegation against the accused is that they made criminal conspiracy and they made the complainant to believe that they would double the amount. Accordingly received an amount of thirty-four lakh, but without giving the amount in double and in the process of escaping with money, they have chased and apprehended one person and a car and others ran away. Considering this aspect, question is how the complainant believed that the petitioners would double the amount. When the accused persons had not given double the amount, the complaint is given even though they made the complainant to believe that they would double the amount within few days. Therefore, at this stage, the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner is also to be considered.

7. Considering the allegations made in the complaint as above stated, the Court is of the opinion that without expressing any opinion on the merits involved in the case, the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail subject to the condition that he shall abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and cooperate with the investigation.

8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

          i) The petition is allowed.

          ii) The petitioner/accused No.2 is enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.60/2026 of Mudhol Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM Court, Mudhola, subject to the following conditions.

          a. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear before the trial Court and shall seek for bail within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

          b. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

          c. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not indulge in the same offence or any other criminal cases, till completion of the trial.

          d. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court.

          e. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not tamper and threaten the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

          f. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall mark his attendance before the concerned police station on every Saturday between 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m till filing final report.

          g. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall attend the Court regularly during the trial without fail. If not attend for consecutive two times, it entails cancellation of bail.

          iii) Violation of any one of the conditions would entails the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail.

 
  CDJLawJournal