The Court of the LXVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-68), presided over by Sri Kashim Churikhan, B.A., LL.M., delivered a judicial order on April 19, 2024, allowing an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The ruling in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2839/2024 extended pre-arrest bail protection to two petitioners—Sri Syeed M. (Accused No. 4) and Sri Shiraj Beigh (Accused No. 5)—in connection with Crime No. 373/2023 registered by the Yeshwanthpura Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of the XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Bengaluru. The petitioners faced apprehension of arrest for alleged offences punishable under Section 506 (criminal intimidation) and Section 420 (cheating) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Matrix and Prosecution Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated from a marital dispute and subsequent financial settlement allegations:

• Matrimonial Grievance and Dowry Allegations: According to the informant, following her marriage to Accused No. 1, he and his family members allegedly subjected her to demands for additional dowry. After her childbirth, when the husband failed to take her back from her parental home, she filed a formal complaint at the Yeshwanthpura Police Station.
• Settlement and Bounced Cheques: During subsequent discussions to resolve the dispute, the parties agreed on a settlement amount of ₹6,50,000/- (citing that Accused No. 1 was suffering from tuberculosis). In furtherance of this settlement, four cheques were issued on May 21, 2022. However, the cheques subsequently bounced upon presentation.
• Allegation of Cheating: The informant alleged that the marriage was performed by concealing Accused No. 1’s medical condition, and that the accused persons fraudulently induced her to withdraw her registered dowry harassment case by issuing worthless, fake cheques.

Details of the Petitioners

• Petitioner No. 1 / Accused No. 4: Sri Syeed M., aged about 43 years, son of Mahaboob Shariff, residing at No. 850-1, 10th Cross, Gokul 1st Stage, 2nd Phase, MSRIT, Bengaluru North, Bengaluru – 560054.
• Petitioner No. 2 / Accused No. 5: Sri Shiraj Beigh, aged about 46 years, son of Adam Beigh, residing at No. 14-3/1, 6th B Cross, K.N. Extension, Yeswanthpura, Bengaluru – 560022.
• Legal Representation: Sri A.P., Advocate
• Prosecution Representation: Learned Public Prosecutor, State by Yeshwanthpura Police Station

Submissions Advanced by the Parties

On Behalf of the Petitioners

1. Prior Acquittal and Parity: The defense maintained that the complainant had previously initiated proceedings under Section 498A IPC against the accused, in which they were acquitted. Counsel emphasized that co-accused (Accused Nos. 1 to 3) had already been enlarged on bail in Crl. Misc. No. 12313/2023, and the present petitioners stood on an identical footing with no specific overt acts attributed to them.
2. Absence of Specific Averments: It was urged that the complaint lacked specific details regarding individual cheque numbers or settlement execution attributed to the petitioners, who hailed from respectable families with deep roots in Bengaluru.

On Behalf of the Respondent (State)

1. Opposition to Pre-Arrest Bail: The learned Public Prosecutor filed formal objections, contending that the investigation was at a preliminary stage and that prima facie materials disclosed active involvement in matrimonial harassment and financial deception through fake settlement instruments.
2. Risk of Flight: The state argued that enlarging the petitioners on anticipatory bail would pose a risk of abscondence, witness tampering, and evidence destruction.

Judicial Findings and Legal Reasoning

Upon evaluating the records, case papers, and rival submissions, Judge Kashim Churikhan recorded definitive findings on Point No. 1:

1. Trial Adjudication: The court observed that the disputed facts and allegations must be established through a full-fledged trial backed by authenticated testimony of prosecution witnesses, and securing the accused for investigation and trial remains the primary criterion.
2. Nature of Penal Provisions: The judge noted that the offences alleged under Sections 420 and 506 IPC are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and are exclusively triable by a Court of Magistrate.
3. Parity and Custodial Unnecessity: Highlighting that co-accused had already secured bail and that the petitioners’ apprehension of arrest was well-founded, the court held that all apprehensions raised by the prosecution could be adequately safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions.

Final Anticipatory Bail Order and Conditions Imposed

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, the Sessions Court allowed the petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

The court ordered that Sri Syeed M. and Sri Shiraj Beigh (Accused Nos. 4 and 5) be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 373/2023 of Yeshwanthpura Police Station, upon executing a personal bond for ₹1,00,000/- each along with a surety for the like sum, subject to the following strict conditions:

1. Investigative Cooperation: The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of the order and assist in the investigation as and when required.
2. Court Attendance: The petitioners shall appear before the trial court on all hearing dates.
3. No Witness Tampering: The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
4. Non-Recidivism: The petitioners shall not indulge in committing any offences.