KABC010162132022
IN THE COURT OF THE LII ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-53)
Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022
PRESENT
Sri.B.G.Pramoda, B.A.L., LL.B.,
LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore.
Crl.Misc.No.6043 /2022
Petitioner:
Sri.Subramani S.
@ Subramani R.,
S/o M.Ramappa,
Aged about 33 years,
R/at No.92/7, 3rd Main, 7th Cross,
Chamarajpet, Bengaluru – 560018.
Also residing at No.45,
Devagana Halli Village, Doddachinna
Halli Post, Kolar – 563120.
(By Sri.Chethan N., Advocate)
-V/S-
Respondent :
State of Karnataka
By Chamarajpet police station
Bengaluru.
(Represented
Prosecutor)
by
learned
Public
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner u/Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C., praying to grant anticipatory bail to him in the event of
his arrest by respondent police in Crime No.64/2022 of
Chamrajpet
police
station
for
the
offence
punishable
u/Sec.379 of IPC on the file of learned 24th ACMM, Bengaluru.
2.

It is stated in the petition that the respondent
police have registered the case in Crime No.64/2022 against
the petitioner alleging the offence punishable u/Sec.379 of
IPC, on the basis of complaint given by one Spoorthi S. It is
further stated in the petition that the petitioner is innocent and
he has not committed any offences as alleged against him.
The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid
crime number.
efforts
to
The respondent police are making hectic
arrest
the
petitioner.

The
petitioner
has
apprehension of his arrest by the respondent police. The
petitioner is the husband of complainant. The petitioner is
residing in the address mentioned in the cause title for the
last one year and having deep roots in the society. There is
no specific overtact attributed to the petitioner which could
attract the aforesaid offence. The petitioner is ready to abide
by any terms and conditions that may be imposed by the
court for his enlargement on bail. The petitioner is ready and
3
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
willing to offer surety to the satisfaction of the court. Hence,
the petitioner has prayed to allow the petition.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed the objection
to the petition along with I.O. report by opposing the grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the
offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are
grave in nature and against to society. It is further stated in
the objection that the petitioner has committed theft of golden
ornaments and cash from the house of the informant on
03.06.2022. It is further stated in the objection that the case
is still investigation stage. At this stage, if the petitioner is
enlarged on bail, he may abscond and he may not appear
before Investigating Officer and may hamper the investigation
of the case. The petitioner may threaten the informant and
other prosecution witnesses and he may try to destroy the
evidence. The petitioner may commit similar offences in
future. Hence, the Learned Public Prosecutor has prayed to
reject the petition filed by the petitioner.
4. Heard the arguments of Learned Public Prosecutor
and Learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the petition,
objection and other materials on record.
5. Having done so, the following points will arise for my
consideration:
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
4
(1) Whether the petitioner has made out
grounds for granting anticipatory bail
u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.,?
(2) What order?
6.

My findings on the above points are as under:
(1) Point No.1
..

In the Affirmative
(2) Point No.2
..

As per final order
for the following:
REASONS
7. Point No.1:- The petitioner has filed the present
petition for grant of anticipatory bail in Cr.No.64/2022 of
Chamrajpet police station which is registered by them against
the petitioner for the offence punishable u/Sec.379 of IPC, on
the basis of the complaint given by one Spoorthi S. before
learned 24th ACMM, Bengaluru. The petitioner has produced
the certified copy of the FIR and information, copy of order
sheet in CC.No.4201/21, NCR report in NCR.No.105/22 and
also produced the certified copy of petition in MC.No.75/22
8. It is stated in the FIR that on 03.06.2022, when the
informant was not in the house, the petitioner being the
husband of the informant has committed the theft of golden
ornaments and cash of Rs.8,000/- belonging to the informant.
9.

The offence alleged against the petitioner is non-
bailable in nature. Since FIR is registered against the
5
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
petitioner by alleging the commission of non-bailable offence,
the petitioner has filed the present petition under the
apprehension of his arrest by the respondent police. It is
alleged in the petition that the respondent police are making
hectic efforts to arrest the petitioner and he has got
reasonable apprehension of his arrest by the respondent
police. Since non-bailable offence is alleged against the
petitioner, there is possibility of arrest of the petitioner by the
respondent police during the course of investigation of the
case.
10.

The offence alleged against the petitioner is not
exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
The alleged offence is triable by the Learned Magistrate. The
petitioner is none other than the husband of the informant. It
is to be noted here that the informant was earlier filed one
complaint against the petitioner and his family members
before the Madanayakanahalli police station by alleging the
offence punishable u/Sec.498(a), 506 r/w Sec.34 of IPC and
Sec.3 and 4 of D.P. Act. The petitioner has produced the
copy of the complaint and also the copy of the order sheet in
CC.No.4201/2021. In the said case, the learned 1st Addl. Civil
Judge and JMFC, Nelmangala has acquitted the present
petitioner and other accused for the said offences. Further it
is to be noted that the petitioner has also filed petition u/Sec.9
6
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
of Hindu Marriage Act against the informant before Learned
Senior Civil Judge Court, Bangarpet, on 27.05.2022.
Whereas the informant has given complaint against the
petitioner before the respondent police on 05.06.2022. From
the aforesaid materials, it is clear that there is a family dispute
between the petitioner and the informant. Whether the
petitioner has committed offence of theft or not has to be
adjudicated only after full-fledged trial.

If the petitioner is
arrested by the respondent police without following the
guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Arnesh
Kumar’s case, the petitioner would be put to unnecessary
hardship and humiliation.
11.

The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by
any terms and conditions that may be imposed by the court
for his enlargement on bail. The petitioner is ready and willing
to offer surety to the satisfaction of the court. The petitioner is
also ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case.
The petitioner is the permanent resident of Bengaluru and he
is residing within the jurisdiction of Learned Magistrate. As
such, there is no chances of petitioner absconding or fleeing
from justice. The presence of the petitioner during the course
of investigation may be secure by imposing suitable terms
and conditions. The
apprehension of the Learned Public
Prosecutor and Investigating Officer can be make good by
7
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
imposing suitable terms and conditions.

Hence, by
considering the reasonable apprehension of arrest of the
petitioner by respondent police with respect to non-bailable
offences and by considering the fact that there is no chances
of the petitioner absconding or fleeing from justice and by
considering the fact that the petitioner is ready to abide by
any terms and conditions imposed by this court for his
enlargement on bail and by looking into the nature and gravity
of the offence alleged against the petitioner, I am of the
opinion that anticipatory bail as prayed for by the petitioner
may be granted by imposing suitable terms and conditions.
Hence, the petition filed by the petitioner is deserves to be
allowed.

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the
Affirmative.
12. Point No.2:- In view of my findings on point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner u/Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed.
The respondent police shall release the petitioner
on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.64/2022 of
Chamrajpet police station for the offence punishable
u/Sec.379 of IPC, pending on the file of learned 24 th
ACMM court, Bangalore, on petitioner executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one
surety for likesum to the satisfaction of the Learned
Magistrate on the following further conditions:-
8
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
CONDITIONS
(1) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating
Officer within two weeks from the date of this order
and he shall furnish all necessary information and
documents to the Investigating Officer as required for
the investigation of the case.
(2) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating
Officer as and when called for and he shall co-operate
with investigation of the case.
(3) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or
any police officer or any hamper with the evidence.
(4) The petitioner shall not try to destroy evidence.
(5) The petitioner shall not leave India without prior
permission of the court.
(6) The petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar
or any other offences in future.
(7) Violation of any of the aforesaid terms and conditions
would entitle for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected and
then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24 th day of
June, 2022).

(B.G.Pramoda)
LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore.

9
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022
10
Crl.Misc.No.6043/2022