Nagaraja Naika K Vs State by

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARRES, IN CRIME NO.162/2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT ARASIKERE POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 316(2), 316(4), 318(2), 318(3), 3(5) OF BNS, 2023 PENDING BEFORE THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT HASSAN.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:9265 CRL.P No. 1861 of 2025

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Accused no.3 in Crime No.162/2024 registered by Arasikere Town Police Station, Hassan District, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(4), 318(2), 318(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, is before this Court under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

¶24

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶25

FIR in Crime No.162/2024 was registered by Arasikere Town Police Station, Hassan District, for the aforesaid offences against Madhu and others on the basis of the first information dated 06.12.2024 received from Sajin S/o Tanganadar, Area Chief of Mannapuram Finance Limited, Hassan. Petitioner herein is arrayed as accused no.3 in the FIR. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioner had filed Crl. Misc. No.1289/2024 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected on 06.01.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

¶27

was working as Cashier in the financing company, and therefore, he had no control and hold over the financing company, and it was accused nos.1 & 2 who had control over

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9265 CRL.P No. 1861 of 2025

¶29

the said articles. Petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the police for the purpose of investigation. Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only for the reason that he was the employee of the financing company in which the alleged fraud had taken place. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶30

Per contra, learned HCGP and the learned Counsel appearing for the defacto complainant who was permitted to assist the prosecution, have opposed the petition. They jointly submit that investigation of the case is under progress and interrogation of the accused is very much necessary since misappropriated gold and cash is required to be recovered from them. They submit that the allegations against accused no.1 and the petitioner herein are similar and the coordinate bench of this Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of accused no.1 in Crl.P.No.209/2025. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.

¶31

The first informant in the present case is the Area Chief of Mannapuram Finance Limited, Hassan, and the accused persons are all the employees of Mannapuram Finance Limited,

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:9265 CRL.P No. 1861 of 2025

¶34

Arasikere Branch, Hassan District. According to the first information, when the first informant visited the branch office of Mannapuram Finance at Arasikere, he found that the gold which was pledged by the customers of the finance company who availed loan, was not deposited in the locker of the financing company, and on the other hand, the accused persons had re-pledged the said jewellery in the name of their friends and relatives and misused the gold jewellery and also misappropriated the amount. As per the averments in the first information, gold jewellery worth Rs.18,74,488/- was misused by the accused persons, and in addition to the same, cash of Rs.25,58,290/- was misappropriated. Therefore, the accused persons had totally misappropriated to the tune of Rs.44,32,778/-.

¶35

In the first information, a specific allegation is made as against accused nos.1 & 3. Accused no.1 was working as branch manager of the finance company while accused no.3 was working as cashier of the finance company in its branch office at Arasikere for the period from 14.09.2023 to 29.11.2024, during which the alleged fraud has taken place.

¶36

5 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:9265 CRL.P No. 1861 of 2025

¶38

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, the anticipatory bail application of accused no.1 in Crl.P.No.209/2025 was rejected by the coordinate bench of this Court on 05.02.2025. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that even the prayer made by the petitioner herein for grant of anticipatory bail needs to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

¶39

Sd /- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶40

KK

Nagaraja Naika K v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagaraja Naika K v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indresh N Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr.Mohamed Abdullah Mohamed Aslan Vs the Superintendent of Customs

Sri Narasimhamurthy @ Sanni @ Urus Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Santhosh S Vs the State of Karnataka

Naveen Vs State of Karnataka

Rahil Vs State by