IN THE COURT OF THE LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59), BENGALURU CITY.
Dated this the 27th 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.6042/2022
PETITIONER
:
Nagendra.B,
C/o Balaraju,
Aged about 39 years,
Residing at No.1, 2nd floor,
3rd Main, 5th Cross,
K.M.Colny, Siddapura,
Near Mallige Hospital,
Jayanagara,
Bengaluru – 560 011.
(By Sri.T.Puttaswamy, Advocate)
V/S
RESPONDENT
:
The State of Karnataka by
Commercial Street 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
2
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime
No.100/2022 for the offences punishable under sections
406, 420 and 506 of IPC, pending on the file of 4 th
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, by allowing
the petition in the ends of justice.

2.

He has further contended that he is an innocent
and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The entire
complaint was not disclosed any of the ingredients of the
offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 of IPC. In
order to extract money, he complainant has filed this
private complaint. The complainant had no capacity to lend
Rs.10,00,000/- and no such transaction was took place. In
the year 2018, he has availed a pretty amount for his daily
necessities and thereafter he returned the same.

At that
time, the complainant had obtained signed cheque. Even
after returning the amount, without returning the cheque
and misused the same. The alleged offences are not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The
respondent police are making hectic efforts to arrest him.
He is a permanent resident of the address shown in the
3
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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 sufficient prima
facie material on record to show that, this petitioner has
committed the alleged offences. The investigation is under
progress. At this stage, if the petitioner is released on bail,
he may terrorize the complainant and prosecution witnesses
and he may abscond from the jurisdiction of this court. Then
fair investigation cannot be conducted. 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
4
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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 complainant Basavaraju has
presented a private complaint under section 200 of Cr.P.C.
against this petitioner before the learned 4th Additional
Metropolitan
Magistrate,
Bengaluru
for
the
offences
punishable under sections 384, 503, 427, 406, 323, 498,
367, 420, 390, 352, 424 and 506 read with section 34 of
IPC. After presenting the said complaint, the Learned
Magistrate has referred the same under section 156(3) of
Cr.P.C. to the respondent police for investigation. Based on
the said reference, the respondent police have registered
5
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
this case and send FIR for the said offences and the
investigation is under progress. At this stage, this petitioner
has come up with this petition seeking anticipatory bail on
the major ground that, there is no prima facie sufficient
material on record to attract the alleged offences and he is
not required for custodial interrogation. He is ready to cooperate for investigation by furnishing solvent surety.
8.

On this back ground, on perusal of the entire
allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that, this
complainant and this petitioner were working together in
Bowring club and they were in good terms. The petitioner
made the complainant to believe that, if he is invested
some money in his liquor business, he would get more
profit.

Accordingly, the complainant pledged the golden
ornaments of his wife and paid Rs.10,00,000/- to the
petitioner. But, subsequently, the petitioner has used the
said amount to his personal expenses and not repaid to the
complainant.

When the complainant has demanded to
repay the said amount, this petitioner has issued two
cheques. When the same were presented for encashment,
6
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
but the same were dishonoured and returned. When the
complainant brought to the facts of dishonour of the
cheques to the petitioner and demanded for payment. But
he has threatened with dire consequences.
9.

But, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, though the alleged offences are non
bailable in nature but the same are not punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. All the alleged offences are
exclusively triable by the Learned Magistrate.
10.

No doubt, as submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor so far the investigation is not completed and
charge sheet is not filed. But, it is not the case of the
prosecution that, this petitioner is required for custodial
interrogation and recovery of any weapon. Moreover, these
proceedings initiated by filing a private complaint by the
complainant. There is no antecedent against this petitioner.
It appears that, he is a permanent resident of the address
shown in the cause title and having deep roots in the
society. When such being the case, the question of flee from
justice is remote chance. There is reasonable apprehension
7
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
of arrest by the respondent police in non bailable offences.
If
stringent
conditions
are
imposed,
the
purpose
of
prosecution may be served. Under all these circumstances
and also considering the nature and gravity of the alleged
offences, 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”.
11.

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.100/2022 for the
offences punishable under sections 406, 420 and
506 of IPC, on his executing a personal bond for a
8
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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 appear before
Investigating Officer and co-operate for
investigation as and when called for.
3. The petitioner shall not commit similar
offences in future.
4. The petitioner shall attend the court
regularly on all the dates of hearing
without fail.
5. The petitioner shall appear before the
learned 4th Additional Chief Metropolitan
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 27th day of June, 2022)
(N.Krishnaiah)
LVIII Addl. City Civil and
Sessions Judge (CCH-59)
Bengaluru City.

9
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
Order pronounced in the open
Court (vide separate order)
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.100/2022 for the
offences punishable under sections 406, 420 and
506 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
6. The petitioner shall not threaten the
prosecution witnesses and tried to tamper
the documents directly or indirectly.
7. The petitioner shall appear before
Investigating Officer and co-operate for
investigation as and when called for.
8. The petitioner shall not commit similar
offences in future.
9. The petitioner shall attend the court
regularly on all the dates of hearing
without fail.

C.Misc.No.3701/2020
1
0
C.Misc.No.6042/2022
10. The petitioner shall appear before the
learned 4th Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bangalore City within 30 days
from the date of this order.

LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59),
BENGALURU CITY.