IN THE COURT OF THE LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59), BENGALURU CITY.
Dated this the 21st 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.5965/2022
PETITIONER
:
Swamy.K,
S/o Kariappa,
Aged about 38 years,
Residing at No.365,
Jai Maruthi Nagar,
Nandini Layout,
Benaluru.
(By Sri.Harisha.M.T., Advocate)
V/S
RESPONDENT
:
The State of Karnataka by
Sadashivnagar 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
event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime
No.79/2020 for the offences punishable under sections 420
2
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
and 468 of IPC, pending on the file of 39 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 not committed the alleged offences. On mere
reading of the complaint clearly discloses that in the year
2013, the complainant started receiving legal notices from
many advocates representing some strangers and court
summons regarding dishonour of cheques. One such notice
was received on 08.09.2020 by the complainant from one
stranger Sri.P.Sreenivasa Reddy.

But the complainant has
lodged the complaint on 24.10.2020 at 17-30 hours. There
is an inordinate delay of 1½ months in lodging the
complaint. The name of the petitioner does not figure in the
FIR or in the complaint.

But the respondent police have
falsely implicated the name of this petitioner based on the
statement given by the accused No.4.

The petitioner is
utterly a stranger to the alleged crime.

He is not aware
anything about any incident as alleged in the complaint.
The entire
allegation is made against her husband
3
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
Dr.Chandu.G.N.

Accordingly, FIR discloses the name of
Chandu and bank officials as accused.

It is purely the
dispute between the complainant with Rama. Wherein the
case in C.C.No.12/2021 is pending against this complainant.
He is a permanent resident of the address shown in the
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 prima facie
sufficient material on record to show that, this petitioner,
who is arrayed as accused No.3 is also involved in the
alleged
offences. The investigation is under progress. At
this stage, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may
tamper the prosecution witnesses and he may abscond from
the jurisdiction of this court. Then fair investigation cannot
4
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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
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.
initiated
POINT NO.1:by
Dr.Madura,
Based on the first information
the
respondent
police
have
registered this case in crime No.79/2020 for the offences
punishable under sections 420 and 468 of IPC and send FIR.

5
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
The accused No.4 was arrested and
produced before the
Learned Magistrate and subsequent date he was released
on bail. The investigation is under progress. At this stage,
this petitioner has come up with this petition seeking
anticipatory bail on the major ground that, absolutely there
is no prima facie materials on record to attract any of the
ingredients of the alleged offences against him. He is not
required for custodial interrogation.
8.

No doubt, as submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor, though there is a serious allegation against her
own
husband
accused
No1
as
he
has
created
the
documents and opened the bank account in her name and
obtained loan and issued cheques to different persons in
her name and thereby cheated to her. But, admittedly,
nowhere
in
the
complaint,
the
name
of
this
petitioner/accused No.3 is not reflected, as to how he is
involved in the alleged offences. Hence, there is no specific
overt act attributed against this petitioner. Solely based on
the voluntary statement given by the accused No.4 appears
to be respondent police implicated this petitioner as an
6
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
accused and making hectic efforts to arrest him.

More
importantly, though the alleged offences are non bailable in
nature.

But the same are not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life. All the offences are triable by the
Learned Magistrate. This accused is a practicing advocate.
He is having permanent abode in the locality and he
undertakes to abide by any terms and conditions that may
be imposed by this court. When such being the case, the
question of flee from justice is remote chance.
9.

Though the investigation is not completed and
charge sheet is not yet filed but it is not the case of the
prosecution that the petitioner is not required for custodial
interrogation. The petitioner is undertaking to appear before
the Investigating Officer and to co-operate for investigation.
He has no criminal antecedent. There is reasonable
apprehension of arrest by the respondent police in non
bailable offences. If stringent conditions are imposed, the
purpose of prosecution may be served. Moreover, accused
No.4 was already released on regular bail. Under these
circumstances and also considering the nature and gravity
7
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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”.
10.

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.79/2020 for the
offences punishable under sections 420 and 468 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
1. The petitioner shall not threaten the
prosecution witnesses and tried to
tamper the documents directly or
indirectly.

8
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
C.Misc.No.3701/2020
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.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her,
corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open
court on this the 21st day of June, 2022)
(N.KRISHNAIAH)
LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59)
BENGALURU CITY.

9
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
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.79/2020 for the
offences punishable under sections 420 and 468 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
5. The petitioner shall not threaten the
prosecution witnesses and tried to
tamper the documents directly or
indirectly.
6. The petitioner shall appear before
Investigating Officer and co-operate for
investigation as and when called for.
7. The petitioner shall not commit similar
offences in future.

C.Misc.No.3701/2020
1
0
C.Misc.No.5965/2022
8. The petitioner shall attend the court
regularly on all the dates of hearing
without fail.

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