1
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
IN THE COURT OF LV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCC-56)
: Present :
Sri. SHRIRAM NARAYAN HEGDE,
B.A., LL.M.,
LV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
DATED: THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023
Crl.Misc. No.533/ 2023
PETITONER/S:
1. KALPANA B.S.
W/O SATISH KUMAR B.
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 999,
59TH ‘C’ CROSS, 4TH ‘M’ BLOCK,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU – 560 010.
2. PALGUNA B.S.
S/O SATISH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 999,
59TH ‘C’ CROSS, 4TH ‘M’ BLOCK,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU – 560 010.
3. SMT.ROOPA
W/O DINESH B.

2
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 999,
59TH ‘C’ CROSS, 4TH ‘M’ BLOCK,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU – 560 010.
(By M/s Law Minds, Adv.)
VERSUS
RESPONDENT
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PEENYA POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU,
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The petitioners / accused have
filed this petition
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking for anticipatory bail.
2.

On the complaint filed by Krishnappa G., a case is
registered at the respondent PS
in Cr.No.231/2021 for
offence punishable u/Ss. 423, 422, 420, 467, 468, 470, 471,
463, 464 of IPC.
3.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that, the
complainant filed a private complaint before the 31 st ACMM,
Bengaluru against the accused contending that he is the
Chief Executive Officer of Janata Co-operative Bank Limited,
3
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
Malleswaram. The accused No.1 and 2 had membership in
that bank.

By suppressing the suit in O.S.No.1856/2012
and also lease deed the accused No.1 to 5 borrowed loan of
Rs.50 lakhs from the bank, on the basis of the industrial
shed No. 422, situated at Industrial Estate, Peenya, Then
the accused again borrowed loan of Rs.15 lakhs and as on
date of suit they are liable to pay Rs.98 lakhs to the bank.
Hence, he prayed to take action against the accused. That
complaint is referred to respondent police and after
investigation, the Investigating officer filed charge sheet
before the trial court.
4.

Now these petitioners are contending that they are
innocent persons and not committed any offence. They are
falsely implicated in this case. There is no allegations
against the accused o.3 to 5.

The alleged offences are
bailable and compoundable in nature.

Only few offences
are non-bailable, but they are not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life.

Now the respondent police are
searching for these petitioners for arrest.

The petitioners
are permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause
4
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
title. They are ready to abide by the conditions that may be
imposed by this court. Hence, prayed to allow the petition.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor has contested this petition
by filing detailed objections by reiterating the case of the
prosecution and further contended that there is prima facie
case against the petitioners. If they are enlarged on bail
they may tamper with prosecution witnesses.

They may
abscond. Hence, prayed to reject the bail application.
6.

Heard arguments and perused the records.

7.

Now the point for consideration is as follows.
“Whether the petitioners / accused have made out
sufficient grounds to grant anticipatory bail by
resorting to special powers vested in this Court under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”
8.

On the basis of the materials available on record my
finding to the above point is in the AFFIRMATIVE for the
following.
REASONS
9.

I have gone through the entire materials available on
record. At the time of his arguments, the learned counsel
5
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
for the petitioners has contended that these petitioners had
already obtained bail from the Hon’ble High Court in Crl.
Petition No. 7773/2021. He has also produced copy of the
order of the Hon’ble High Court.

On going through that
order, it reveals that conditions that their bail application
was allowed.

Even though the alleged offences are non-
bailable, but they are not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life.

It is not in dispute that the
petitioners are the permanent resident of the address
mentioned in the cause title. They are ready to abide by
the conditions that may be imposed by this court.
Reasonable conditions will meet the apprehension of the
prosecution. Considering all these aspects, in my opinion,
the petitioners are entitled for an order of anticipatory bail.
The investigation is already completed.

Hence, the
aforesaid point is answered in the AFFIRMATIVE and
proceed to pass the following.
ORDER
Bail petition filed by the petitioners / accused under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed, on the following
conditions.

6
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
1.
2.
3.
4.

The petitioners / accused shall execute personal bond,
in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with one surety for
likesum, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
They shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses in
any manner.
They shall not commit similar offences.
They shall attend the trial court, on all dates of
hearing without fail.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by him and
then corrected by me and then pronounced in the open
court on this the 24th day of JANUARY 2023)
(SHRIRAM NARAYAN HEGDE),
LV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru. (CCH-56)
7
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
Order passed and pronounced in the
open court (vide separate order). The
operative portion of the order reads thus:
8
Crl.Misc.No.533/2023
ORDER
Bail petition filed by the
petitioners / accused under Section
438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed, on
the following conditions.
1.
The petitioners / accused shall
execute personal bond,in a sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- each with one surety for
likesum, to the satisfaction of the trial
court.
2.
They shall not tamper with
prosecution witnesses in any manner.
3.
They shall not commit similar
offences.
4.
They shall attend the trial court,
on all dates of hearing without fail.
LV A.C.C & S.J., (CCH-56)