THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO. 75/2008, REGISTERED IN C.C. NO. 202/2009 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 302, 201, 109 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NELAMANGALA.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused no.6 in CC.No.202/2009 pending before the Court of Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Nelamangala, arising out Crime No.75/2008 registered Nelamangala Police Station, Bengaluru Rural District, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 201, 109 read with 149 IPC, is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.75/2008 was registered by Nelamangala Police Station, Bengaluru Rural District, initiates for the offences punishable under Sections 302 & 201 IPC. After compleing investigation, charge sheet has been filed in the said case against seven persons. Petitioner is arrayed as accused no.6 in the charge sheet. Apprehending arrest in the case, petitioner had filed Crl. Misc. No.44/2026 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected on 10.02.2026. Therefore, he is before this Court.

4. Material on record would go to show that the petitioner was throughout absconding in the present case and in the charge sheet which was filed, he is shown as an absconding accused. The case as against the petitioner was, therefore, split-up before the committal court and the same is pending in CC.No.202/2009, while the case as against the other accused has been committed to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

5. The records reveal that though coercive steps were taken by the committal court to secure the presence of the petitioner, he has successfully avoided the court process. The committal court has issued proclamation orders as against the petitioner in the year 2013 itself. Petitioner is a proclaimed offender and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS PRADEEP SHARMA - (2014)2 SCC 174, has observed that in normal circumstances, anticipatory bail application filed by the accused who are declared as proclaimed offenders should not be entertained.

6. No exceptional circumstances are found in the present case to extend the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner who is a proclaimed offender in a heinous offence.

Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail was rightly rejected by the jurisdictional Sessions Court. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.