Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.Vishwajith Shetty
A.M. Hanumante Gowda – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka By The Halasurugate Police Station – Respondent
ORDER :
S Vishwajith Shetty, J.
1. Accused nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.201/2024 registered by Ulsoor Gate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 464 , 420, 465, 468, 471, 34 of IPC, are before this Court in these two petitions filed under Section 482 of BNSS , 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.201/2024 was registered by Ulsoor Gate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the aforesaid offences against the petitioners herein based on the first information received from Rajanikanth - Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru South Sub-Division, Bengaluru City. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioners had filed Crl. Misc. No.8325/2024 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 27.09.2024. Therefore, they are before this Court.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute involved is purely civil in nature. By giving a criminal texture to the same, a criminal case has been registered against the petitioners. The allegations found in the first information are based on documentary evidence and petitioners and ready and willing to cooperate with the police for
Anticipatory bail granted when allegations are based on documentary evidence; custodial interrogation deemed unnecessary given the age and health of the primary accused.
Anticipatory bail granted where no criminal offence is established and the matter is primarily civil in nature.
Anticipatory bail is not to be granted routinely; it requires exceptional circumstances, and the court must assess the prima facie case and potential impact on the investigation.
The court granted anticipatory bail to the accused, finding no justification for custodial interrogation given the civil nature of disputes and significant delay in filing the FIR.
Anticipatory bail denied due to insufficient proof of transaction and serious allegations of fraud.
The court held that anticipatory bail is warranted where pre-trial incarceration lacks justification, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the nature of allegations.
The court emphasized that anticipatory bail must balance individual rights against the seriousness of allegations, particularly in cases involving forgery and fraud in land transactions.
The predominantly civil nature of a dispute and the lack of previous criminal history of the applicant can be considered in granting anticipatory bail.
The power of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised in exceptional cases, and custodial interrogation may be necessary for effective investigation in certain cases.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
