IN THE COURT OF THE LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59), BENGALURU CITY.
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2022
PRESENT:
Sri.N.Krishnaiah, B.Sc., LL.B.,
LVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH-59),
Bengaluru City.
CRL.MISC.No.5922/2022
PETITIONER
:
Harpreet Sing Dhesi,
S/o Shivacharan Singh Dhesi,
Aged about 60 years,
Residing at No.461,
80feet Cross Road,
Ideal Home Township,
Raja Rajeshwari Nagar,
Bengaluru – 560 079.
(By Sri.A.N.Radhakrishna, Advocate)
V/S
RESPONDENT
:
The State of Karnataka by
Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.
The petitioner has filed this petition under section 438 of
Cr.P.C., seeking to enlarge him on anticipatory bail
in the
event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime
2
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
No.157/2016 for the offences punishable under section 120-B
and 201 read with section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of 3 rd
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, by allowing the
petition in the ends of justice.

2.

He has further contended that based on the
complaint lodged by CW-1 Mahadevi, the respondent police
have registered this case in crime No.157/2016 for the
offences punishable under sections 465, 468, 471 and 428
read with section 34 of IPC. After registering this case, this
petitioner
was
approached
this
court
by
filing
C.Misc.No.6024/2016 and obtained anticipatory bail for the
offences punishable under sections 465, 468, 471 and 428
read with section 34 of IPC.

In pursuance of the said bail
order, he has also appeared before the respondent police and
offered surety. But after completion of the investigation, the
respondent police have filed the charge sheet by added the
offence punishable under sections 120-B and 201 of IPC in
addition to the other offences as stated in FIR.

Now, the
respondent police are making hectic efforts to arrest him in
the offences punishable under sections 120-B and 201 of IPC.

3
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
He is entirely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this case. The allegations are purely civil in nature. He has
not violated any terms and conditions imposed in the earlier
bail order. More over, now the investigation is completed and
charge sheet is already filed, he is not required for further
interrogation.

The alleged offences are not punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. He is a permanent resident of
the address shown in the cause title and having deep roots in
the society. He is ready and willing to abide by any terms and
conditions that may be imposed by this court and he is ready
to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he requests to allow
this petition in the ends of justice.

3.

On the contrary, the learned Public Prosecutor has
filed his objections and strongly opposed to allow this petition
on the major ground that, there is prima facie sufficient
materials on record to show that, this petitioner
is also
involved in the alleged offences. Though he was released on
bail, but without appearing before the court, he had been
absconded. At this stage, if the petitioner is released on bail,
he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he may
4
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
abscond from the jurisdiction of this court. Hence, he requests
to reject the petition in the ends of justice.

4.

In view of the aforesaid rival contentions, the
following points that would arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
anticipatory bail under section 438 of
Cr.P.C., as prayed for in this petition?
2. What Order?
5.

Heard arguments of both the sides and perused
the records.
6.

My finding to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1:- In the Affirmative
Point No.2:- As per the final order
for the following;
REASONS
7.

POINT NO.1:-
The
respondent police have
initiated the proceedings against this petitioner and accused
Nos.2 to 5. During the crime stage admittedly this petitioner
5
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
was enlarged on anticipatory bail for the offences punishable
under sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 read with section 34 of
IPC. But in the FIR, sections 201 and 120-B were not added.
Only after investigation, the respondent police have added
sections
201
and
120-B
of
IPC
in
the
charge
sheet.

Moreover, by considering the nature and gravity of the
offenses alleged, he was released on bail during the crime
stage.

Admittedly, sections 120-B and 201 of IPC are non
bailable offences. There is reasonable apprehension of arrest
by the respondent police for these two offences. Accordingly
they have approached this court seeking anticipatory bail for
the alleged offences.
8.

No doubt, as submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor, there is an allegation as this accused No.1 has
committed criminal conspiracy, forged the documents and
cheated the complainant. They have not produced the forged
documents and attempted to destroy the evidence, which
attracts
the offences punishable under sections 120-B and
201 of IPC. Though the alleged offences are non bailable in
nature but the same are not punishable with death or
6
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
imprisonment for life. Moreover, when this petitioner has
already granted bail for the major offences punishable under
sections 420 and 468 of IPC,
he is also entitled for
anticipatory bail for these offences punishable under sections
120-B and 201 of IPC.
Moreover, the investigation is already completed and
charge sheet is filed. Accordingly, this petitioner is not
required for custodial interrogation.
against this petitioner.

There is no antecedent
Admittedly, he has not violated any
terms and conditions of the previous bail order. Under these
circumstances, if stringent conditions are imposed, the
purpose
of
prosecution
may
be
served.

Therefore,
by
considering the nature and gravity of the offences alleged
against the petitioner, it is a fit case to extend the
discretionary power in favour of this petitioner. Therefore, the
petitioner has made out sufficient grounds to entertain this
petition and hence, he is entitled for anticipatory bail as
prayed for in this petition.

In view of the above reasons, I
answer the point No.1 in the “Affirmative”.

7
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
9.

POINT NO.2:-
In the result, I proceed to pass the
following;
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner under section
438 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed.

The respondent-police are hereby directed to
release the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event
of his arrest in Crime No.157/2016 for the offences
punishable under sections 120-B and 201 read with
section 34 of IPC, on his executing a personal bond for
a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, with two sureties for the
likesum, subject to the following:
CONDITIONS
1. The petitioner shall not threaten the
prosecution witnesses and tried to tamper
the documents directly or indirectly.
2. The petitioner shall not commit similar
offences in future.
3. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer and co-operate for
investigation as and when called for.
4. The petitioner shall attend the court
regularly on all the dates of hearing
without fail.

8
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
5. The petitioner shall appear before the
jurisdictional Magistrate, Bangalore City
within 30 days from the date of this order.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected,
signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this
the 20th day of June, 2022)
(N.KRISHNAIAH)
LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59)
BENGALURU CITY.

9
C.Misc.No.5922/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
Order pronounced in the open Court
(vide separate order)
ORDER
LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59),
BENGALURU CITY.