IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101383/2019

BETWEEN :

SRI KASHINATH S/O.LAKSHMANA

AGE : 35 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS,

R/O.KAVITHAL POST, MANVI TALUK,

DIST : RAICHUR- 584 123,

NOW R/AT H.NO.2 ALKOD VILLAGE,

TQ : DEVADURGA, DIST : RAICHUR-584 129.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI MRUTYUNJAY S.HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE)

AND

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH SHO, BRUCEPET POLICE STATION,

BALLARY,

REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SMT.SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF

CR.P.C. AND PRAYED TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND

FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE

THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS

ARREST

IN

CRIME

NO.286/2011

(C.C.NO.411/2013)

REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER

SECTIONS 408, 420 AND 471 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE

2

OF I ADDITIONAL JMFC, BALLARY IN THE INTEREST OF

JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under

Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail in

Criminal Case No.411/2013 on the file of I Additional

JMFC, Ballary for the offence punishable under Sections

408, 420 and 471 of IPC .

2.

The case of petitioner is that, the complainant

filed the complaint before the Bengaluru Cubban Park

Police Station, subsequently on the point of jurisdiction it

has been transferred to the Brucepet Police Station, Ballary

on registering the same in Crime No.286/2011, Police have

also arrested the accused person and obtained the police

custody. Thereafter, he has produced before the Court and

then he was remanded to judicial custody and the

petitioner had obtained regular bail and thereafter charge

sheet came to be filed, summons was issued to the

petitioner, but he failed to appear before the Court.

Thereafter, the trial Court issued N.B.W., also proclamation

3

and attachment under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. even

then the police not able to trace the accused/petitioner.

During the pendency of execution of NBW, the petitioner

had approached the Sessions Court at Ballary by filing the

petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory

bail which came to be dismissed on 23.05.2018 in Criminal

Misc.No.433/2018. Hence the petitioner is before this

Court.

3.

The

learned

counsel

for

petitioner

has

contended that previously though the trial Court granted

bail to the petitioner, subsequently a summons was not

served on him as he was shifted his house to the

Bengaluru and he has not aware about the pendency of

the case and issuance of summons. Thereafter, NBW has

been issued by the Court and his bail was not cancelled.

Therefore, he has approached the Sessions Court for

granting anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected. He

prayed for granting anticipatory bail and contended that he

is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this

Court and even once the regular bail is granted by the

4

Court, the petition for granting anticipatory bail is

maintainable.

4. Per Contra, Smt Seema Shiva Naik, learned HCGP

objects to the bail petition and she contended that after

granting of bail, the petitioner was absconded for long time

and once the regular bail has been granted, anticipatory

bail is not maintainable and he has to approach the trial

Court for recalling the warrant issued against him by filing

necessary application. Hence, she prays to reject the

petition.

5. Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of the

records produced, it is not in dispute that the Brucepet

Police registered a case against the petitioner/accused in

Crime No.286/2011 for the offences punishable under

Sections 408, 420 and 471 of IPC. It is also not in dispute

that