KABC010086382024 IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46) DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 PRESENT: Sri Manjunatha, B. A. LL.B., XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. CRL.MISC. No.3062/2024 Petitioners 1.Mani Bharathi D/o T N T naveen, a/a 31 Yrs., 2.Smt. Anandi W/o TNT Naveen, a/a 54 Yrs., Both are r/a /a No.264, Near Grace and Truth Church, 6th Ward, Bommasandra, Beengaluru-562 125. (By Sri/Smt: A. B. Narayanaswamy, Advocate) AND Respondent State by Byappanahalli P.S., Bengaluru. (By the learned Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/S.438 OF Cr.P.C., The learned counsel for the petitioners has filed bail petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners and also direct the respondent police to 2 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 release them on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.28/2024 in the interest of justice.

2. On the basis of the private complaint filed by Smt.S.

Nalini, a/a 35 Yrs., w/o of second accused the case was registered against the petitioners and others in PCR No.4677/2023 for the offences punishable U/s.66, 66 (c), 66(E) and 67 of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sec.354C and 354D of IPC. The learned Magistrate acting U/s.156(3) of Cr.P.C. referred the matter to the Byappanayhalli police for investigation and hence, the case in Crime No.28/2024 has been registered against the petitioners and others by the respondent police for the offences as alleged. The Petitioners being accused No.1 and 3 apprehending their arrest at the hands of respondent police and constrained to file this petition to grant bail.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed objection in

detail along with the case diary by reiterating the contents of the Complaint and contended that this bail petition is not maintainable in law or on facts of the case. Further, she has reiterated the contents of Complaint and also contended that if petitioners are granted bail then they may involve in causing mental and physical harassment to the Complainant and also chance of destroying the evidence and hamper the witnesses and has prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.

4. Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the

materials on record.

5. The following points that arises for consideration of this

Court: 3 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024

1. Whether the Petitioners have made out

sufficient grounds for granting anticipatory bail in their favour in Cr. No.28/2024 of ByappanahalliP.S.,atthisstageassoughtfor?

2. Whatorder?

6. This court has answered the above points are as

under: PointNo.1 : IntheNegative PointNo.2 : Asperfinalorder forthefollowing:- R E A S O N S

7. Point No. 1 : On considering the papers on record, it

is evident to note that a case was registered by the learned Magistrate in PCR No.4677/2023 against the petitioners and another on the basis of private complaint filed by Smt.S. Nalini, a/a 35 Yrs., for the offences punishable U/s.66, 66 (C), 66(E) and 67 of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sec.354C and 354D of IPC. The learned Magistrate referred the matter to Byappanhalli police for investigation and hence, the case in Crime No.28/2024 was registered against the petitioners and others for the offences as alleged. It is the case of the complainant that on 21.08.2020 the marriage of accused No.2 was solemnized with the complainant, and out of the wedlock they blessed with a child, since the marriage the accused No.1 to 3 subjected the complainant to physical and mental cruelty, by snatching her child in the month of December 2022 ousted the complainant from the matrimonial home, after lapse of 15 days the 4 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 complainant brought back her child. The mobile bearing No.9632717010 used by the complainant is got registered in the adhaar card of accused No.2, and immediately after the quarrel accused No.2 obtained a duplicate sim card, and stolen the data of email and whatsapp of complainant with the help of accused No.1 and 3 and harassed the complainant. Already dowry harassment case has been registered against the accused persons, in that regard hacked the email of complainant, and received the data of google drive, face book instagram and whatsapp, the accused No.1 and 2 were also observing the activities of complainants sister, and following the complainant. The accused No.1 by hacking the jala account of complainant, and when the complainant went along with her child, followed her and harassed her mentally. Without the knowledge of the complainant, and accused No.2 with another girl captured the photos and recorded the video, complainant came to know the same, and by keeping the same the4 accused No.2 used to harass the complainant and also threatened not to talk against him. The accused No.1 and 3 have also supported the act of accused No.1, by defaming the complainant in front of her family and friends. Accordingly, complainant has lodged the complaint against the accused persons. 8.The contention of petitioners is that they are innocent of the alleged offences. The complainant has implicated the petitioners, though the said offence is not committed by them. They are s ready to abide by the terms and conditions and 5 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 furnish surety to the satisfaction of the Court and prayed to allow the petition. 9.The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the respondent police have registered FIR in Crime No.28/2024 against the petitioners and others for the offences punishable U/s.66, 66 (C), 66(E) and 67 of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sec.354C and 354D of IPC The investigation of the case is in progress and at this stage if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, who have committed the offence as alleged, petitioners might abscond and would not be available for investigation. It is also the specific contention and objection of the prosecution is that the petitioners with intention and knowledge in collusion with accused No.2 have committed the offences as alleged and if he is released on bail he would tamper, threatened the complainant and her witnesses and hamper the investigation. Further it is the case of the prosecution that the materials on record prima-facie discloses the involvement of the petitioners in commission of the alleged offences and at this stage the contention of petitioners that they are innocent of the offences alleged against them does not stand for consideration. It is not desirable on the part of this Court at this stage to come to the conclusion that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them. 10.It is pertinent to note that even for the sake of argument, it is accepted that there is prima facie case against the petitioners for the offences punishable U/s.66, 66 (C), 66(E) and 67 of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sec.354C and 6 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 354D of IPC, the said offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, exclusively triable by the Magistrate. 11.It is well settled principle of law that the granting of bail is discretionary power of the Court and every case should be considered on the basis of facts of each case. On perusal of the entire records placed before the Court, prima facie it discloses that the petitioners in collusion with accused No.2 by hacking the personal data of complainant used to insult and defame her character in front of her friends and family members. On considering all these aspects prima facie discloses the involvement of petitioners in committing the alleged offences against the complainant. Further at this stage it is found that when there is allegations hacking personal data of complainant and threatening her to publish her personal data, interrogation of the petitioners to ascertain the data is very much required. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail that there is likelihood that they might not co-operate with the investigation and might continue the harassment to the complainant. It is pertinent to note the petitioners have committed the offence and at this stage, if the petitioners is enlarged on bail, it would be very difficult for investigation. The materials facts before the Court prima facie discloses the involvement of petitioners in committing the alleged offence against women and society. At this stage, the gravity and seriousness of the offence and the direct involvement of the accused/petitioners in hacking the personal data of complainant has to be considered in priority while considering the anticipatory bail to the petitioners, when there is serious allegation of defaming, insulting and threatening 7 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 to the complainant. It is clear that there appears to be prima facie case made out by the prosecution that an offence has been alleged to has been committed by the petitioners. It is pertinent to note that the investigation is not yet completed and if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail for the offences as alleged, there is chance that they may hamper the investigation and also cause injuries to the complainant. The petitioners have failed to make out any ground for granting anticipatory bail in their favour at this stage as sought for. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the Negative.

12. Point No.2: In view of answer of this court on point

No.1, this court pass the following:- O R D E R The bail petition filed by the petitioners U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed. (Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 6th day of April, 2024) (Manjunatha) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Digitally signed by MANJUNATH MANJUNATH RAMA NAIK RAMA NAIK Date: 2024.04.25 16:18:42 +0530 8 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024 Order pronounced in the open court vide its separate order O R D E R The bail petition filed by the petitioners U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed. (Manjunatha) XLV ACC & SJ, Bengaluru. 9 Crl.Misc.No.3062/2024