The petitioner sought anticipatory bail for alleged offences under Sections 408 and 420 IPC regarding missing mobile phones. The court examined the complaint and found the allegations grounded in missing property dishonestly taken from the employer's custody by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2023:KHC:35992 CRL.P No. 3821 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3821 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KRIPA VAIBHAV C S/O CHALUVARAJ AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT.NO.320, 3RD MAIN 3RD CROSS, LAGGERE PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES CHOWDESHWARINAGAR BENGALURU PIN 560 058.
(BY SRI K.S. SURYA PRAKASH REDDY, ADV.)
AND:
…PETITIONER
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANDRALAYOUT POLICE STATION BENGALURU.
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SOWMYA R, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN THE CR.NO.9/2023 REGISTERED BY CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 408, 420 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2023:KHC:35992 CRL.P No. 3821 of 2023
ORDER
NC: 2023:KHC:35992 CRL.P No. 3821 of 2023
himself and was not responding to the call made by the complainant. It is under these circumstances, he had approached the police station and lodged the complaint which had resulted in registering FIR in Crime No.9/2023 against the petitioner.
showroom informed the complainant that the petitioner was in charge of the said mobile phones. Petitioner has unauthorizedly absented himself and he also has not attended the phone calls from the complainant. Petitioner who was in charge of the mobile phones is required to offer an explanation, since the said phones are found missing in the showroom. The total cost of the missing I-Phones is said to be Rs.12,79,499/-. Petitioner has not even responded to the phone calls of the complainant and he has been absconding ever since the registration of FIR against him. Considering the nature of allegations in the complaint, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. Under the circumstances, petitioner is not entitled for the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
SD/JUDGE
KK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail apprehending arrest for alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust?
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Kripa Vaibhav C S/O Chaluvaraj
The State of Karnataka
S Vishwajit Shetty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
