1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7148 of 2021

BETWEEN

SRI BASANA SUNNY DEEPESH

AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS

S/O. SRI BASANA RAVISHNAKR

RESIDING AT No.3-60-290

KOTHAPETA, NEAR VANI

VISHAKAPATNAM

ANDHRA PRADESH - 531 162.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI SURESH D. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY CCPS, CID.,

BENGALURU CITY

REPRESENTED BY HCGP

BENGALURU - 560 009.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438

OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO

ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS

ARREST IN CRIME No.7/2020 OF CCPS., BENGALURU CITY, FOR

THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 66(E), 67 AND

67A OF I.T. ACT READ WITH SECTIONS 354(A), 354(D) AND

506 OF THE IPC.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

2

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under

Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in Crime

No.7/2020 registered by Cyber Crime Police, Bangalore,

for the offences punishable under Section 66(E), 67, 67A

of IT Act and read with 354(A), 354(D) and 506 of IPC.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint

of the victim to the Police filed on 03.06.2020 alleging that

when she was studying in T.P.I.S. College of Engineering,

Vijayanagaram, Andhra Pradesh, she came in contact with

the petitioner, who is also a student. While studying in

college, they became friends and went to so many places.

Subsequently, in 2016, she left to Hyderabad and got job.

Thereafter, she got married to some other person on

26.02.2020 and moved to Bengaluru along with her

husband. After marriage, from 27.02.2020 till 02.06.2020,

she received threatening calls and e-mails from this

3

petitioner. He threatened to leak out her pictures on social

media and also some pictures taken by him without her

knowledge and would sent it to her relatives through

facebook. She further alleges that the accused is working

in Oman as per facebook details. He is having so many

numbers and prior to her marriage, she deleted all

messages which she received from the petitioner. The

accused is denying all these acts with an intention to ruin

her marriage and professional life and compelled her to

have sex with him. Therefore, she sought legal action

against him. After registering the case, the Police are

making hectic efforts to arrest this petitioner. His bail

petition came to be rejected by the Sessions Judge.

Hence, he is before this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been

falsely implicated by the complainant and he never

threatened the complainant at any point of time. He is

ready to co-operate with the investigation and ready abide

4

by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

Hence, prayed for granting bail.

5.

Learned High Court Government Pleader objected

the bail petition and contended that he is required for

custodial interrogation for seizing the photographs and

other materials from him. Hence, prayed for rejecting the

bail petition.

6.

Upon hearing the arguments and perusal of the

record reveals that the petitioner and the complainant

were studying in the College. Thereafter, they became

friends. Later, she married to some other person and

moved to Bengaluru, but this petitioner said to have

followed her and gave threatening calls by sending her

pictures and threatened to have sexual intercourse with

him otherwise, he will release her pictures in the social

media as well as send the same to her relatives. She has

also