Criminal Petition No. 6187 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6187 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / BETWEEN: 482(BNSS)-) KIRAN S S/O. LATE SESHAGIRI. K. B., AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.1988, 8TH MAIN, E BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. (BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER
Legal Reasoning
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NORTH CEN POLICE STATION, WEST DIVISION, BENGALURU CITY, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP) …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THEM ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN CRIME NO.112/2025 IN WEST CEN CRIME POLICE STATION FOR THE O/P/U/S 66D OF I.T ACT 2000 AND SECTION 318(4), 319(2) OF BNS, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU. ADDITIONAL 45TH THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
Decision
ORDER This petition is filed by the accused No.1 seeking for anticipatory bail in Crime No.112/2025, registered by the West CEN Crime Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 318(4), 319(2) of BNS, 2023. Brief facts of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that one Maharudra filed a complaint stating that on 24.01.2025, the complainant received a text message from an unknown person namely Mr. Vijay Thakur and he was added to a WhatsApp group on 02.02.2025. He was informed that he could get profits through Option Trading and IPO allocations. Further, he was instructed that he could get huge profits by using NIRMAI INT Trading APP and was asked to download the said application via Google Play Store by using a link provided in the group. 3. It is further alleged that, the complainant stated to have deposited Rs.10,000/- on 05.02.2025 and also he was then induced to deposit further amount on various accounts. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 Consequently, the complainant from 05.02.2025 to 10.03.2025, had invested a total of Rs.90,45,200/-. However, when the complainant requested the return of his funds, he was denied. Therefore, he lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others. 4. Heard Sri Lethif.B, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Vinay Mahadevaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 5. It is submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no allegation against the petitioner in the entire complaint. However, during the course of investigation, it is alleged that the petitioner had introduced the complainant to the accused group. It is further submitted that there are no financial transactions between the complainant and the petitioner. The petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation, however, he would co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, learned HCGP would submit that the nature of the allegations made in the complaint would indicate - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 that the accused along with the others formed a group with an intention to commit cheating by way of inducing the innocent people to deposit the amount into the company which is not in existence and also assured that they would pay the huge interest in that regard. As such, they used to deceive the people by one and other way. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner as he has introduced the petitioner and also inducing him to deposit such huge amount. Making such submissions, he prays to reject the bail. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective partiers, and also perused the averments of the complaint, though the averments of the complaint would indicate that the complainant was allegedly induced to deposit a huge amount on the ground that he would receive good returns from the company, the facts remain that the complainant had deposited a total sum of Rs.90,45,200/- from 05.02.2025 to 10.03.2025 through various accounts. However, there are no specific allegations made against the petitioner in the complaint. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner by imposing suitable conditions. 8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following the order: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.112/2025 registered by respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 318(4), 319(2) of BNS, pending on the file of the 45th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdiction police. (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police within one month from today to execute the bond and also the surety. (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police on fortnightly Saturday between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and he has to affix his signature till filing of the charge sheet. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18312 CRL.P No. 6187 of 2025 (iv) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. (v) The petitioner shall not commit similar offences till disposal of the case. (vi) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (vii) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the jurisdictional Police Station forthwith. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMC/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34 CT:SK