SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 23210

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S RACHAIAH
SRI HARISHA K – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 2987/2026



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21138 CRL.P No. 2987 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2987 OF 2026

(438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SRI HARISHA K

S/O.KEMPANNA,

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/A.6TH CROSS,

MARIGOWDA LAYOUT,

OPP SOMESHWARA RICE MILL,

MANDYA - 571 401.

Digitally

2. SMT.JYOTHI.K, signed by PAVITHRA N W/O.LINGA MURTHY,

Location:

High Court AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, of Karnataka

R/A.NO.104, PRUTHVI VERNA,

NO.116/1, KUTTIYAPPAN GARDEN,

NEAR SRINIVASA KALYANA MANTAPA,

BILEKAHALLI, B.G ROAD,

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21138 CRL.P No. 2987 of 2026

HC-KAR

BENGALURU - 560 076.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA M R.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE

REPRESENTED BY

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKER VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HRISH GANAPATHY., HCGP)

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.438 (FILED U/S.482 BNSS)

CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THEM ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.53/2026 OF MICO LAYOUT POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 329(4), 305, 3(5) OF BNS WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CMM

BENGALURU.

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21138 CRL.P No. 2987 of 2026

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL ORDER

1. This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners

herein who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.53/2026 filed by the respondent - Police for the offences punishable under Section 329(4), 305 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNS).

Factual matrix of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Sri.

Santosh Kumar Thakur had lodged a complaint stating that he was residing in Flat No.202 at Pruthvi Verna Apartment since February-2024. The rent was paid upto January 2025 and the maintenance charges were also paid up to February 2025. On 16.02.2025 the complainant left for his native Bihar. On 22.12.2025 the complainant returned to Bangalore to clear the pending rent from

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21138 CRL.P No. 2987 of 2026

HC-KAR

February-2025 to December-2025, by that time, the complainant got to know that the said flat had been sold by the owner to another person without any information to the tenant. On enquiry about the household articles, the Apartment Manager by name Harish and the Maintenance in-charge, Jyothi expressed ignorance and directed the complainant to contact the owner. However, the owner had blocked the phone number of the complainant and he was not reachable on phone. Hence, the complainant lodged a complaint stating that during his absence, the petitioner had trespassed into the flat and taken away household articles without his knowledge. Hence, the

complaint.

3. Based on the said information, the respondent

– Police registered a case. The investigation is under

progress.

4. Heard Sri. Abhilash Kumar M.N., appearing for

Sri. Nanjunda Gowda M.R., learned counsel for the

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21138 CRL.P No. 2987 of 2026

HC-KAR

petitioner and Sri. Harish Ganapathy, learned High Court

Government Pleader for respondent.

5. The submission of the learned counsel for the

petitioners is that the petitioners are the Apartment Manager and the Maintenance in-charge of the flat. The complainant was staying as a tenant. However, without any information, in February-2025, the complainant left the premises by locking the door till December-2025, he was not found in the said premises. In the meantime, the owner of house had sold the property to another prospective purchaser. Thereafter, the flat has been handed over to the purchaser. The complainant with an ulterior motive to avoid payment of rent has filed a false complaint against the present petitioners. The petitioners are reputed persons in the locality and having deep root in the society. They will abide by the c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top