Kum Diksha Kumari @ Diksha @ Kumari Diksha Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:14015 CRL.P No. 3546 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3546 OF 2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KUM. DIKSHA KUMARI @ DIKSHA @ KUMARI DIKSHA D/O SUDHIR KUMAR SRIVASTAVA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT ANAND VIHAR COLONY, NEAR STATE BANK OF INDIA, AGHORIYA CHOWK, MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR- 842 002.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. MANOJ S.N., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SOUTH EAST CEN POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE S.P.P., OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF BHARATIYA NAGARIKA SURAKSHA SANHITA - 2023 PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL THEREBY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT SOUTH EAST CEN POLICE TO RELEASE THE

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:14015 CRL.P No. 3546 of 2025

¶18

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.11/2025 REGISTERED BY THE SOUTHEAST CEN POLICE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 72, 72(A), 66(D) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 AND SEC.318(4), 319(2) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF XLV ACJM, BENGLAURU, IN THE EVENT OF ARREST.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Accused No.1 in Crime No.11/2025 registered by South East CEN Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 72, 72(A), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, is before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶24

FIR in Crime No.11/2025 was registered against the petitioner and another based on the first information dated 07.01.2025 received from Mr. Win Koul, Corporate Legal

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14015 CRL.P No. 3546 of 2025

¶26

Counsel for a company known as Ragus Healthcare Private Limited, Bengaluru. Apprehending arrest in the case, petitioner had filed Crl.Misc.No.1353/2025 before the Sessions Court which was rejected on 27.02.2025 and therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a lady aged about 27 years and she has no criminal antecedents. Undisputedly she was an employee of the company known as Ragus Healthcare Private Limited, Bengaluru, and the allegations are based on documentary evidence. Petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the police for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, learned counsel prays to allow the petition.

¶28

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the petition.

¶29

Perusal of the averments found in the first information dated 07.01.2025 which has resulted in registering FIR in the present case against the petitioner and another for the alleged offences would go to show that petitioner and the other accused were the employees of the company known as Ragus

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:14015 CRL.P No. 3546 of 2025

¶32

Healthcare Private Limited, Bengaluru. The allegation against them is that they had misappropriated certain amount by illegally diverting the amounts making false claim for referral bonuses.

¶33

Petitioner is a lady aged about 27 years having no criminal antecedents against her. The allegation made in the first information are based on documentary evidence and all documents are in the custody of the Company. Petitioner has undertaken to co-operate with the police for the purpose of investigation. Alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and maximum punishment for the said offences is imprisonment for a period of seven years. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for anticipatory bail has to be answered affirmatively.

¶34

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

¶35

The respondent - Police or any other police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioner in the event of her arrest in Crime No.11/2025 registered by the South East CEN Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

¶36

5 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:14015 CRL.P No. 3546 of 2025

¶38

2023 and Sections 72, 72(A), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, subject to the following conditions:

¶39

(i) The Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶40

(ii) Petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.

¶41

(iii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witness and shall co-operate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon.

¶42

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

¶43

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶44

sac

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50

Kum Diksha Kumari @ Diksha @ Kumari Diksha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kum Diksha Kumari @ Diksha @ Kumari Diksha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sannamallige Vs State by Bilikere Ps

Sri Syed Afsan Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Nikhil M M Vs State of Karnataka

John Michael Vs State of Karnataka

Marappa Reddygari Shivareddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Anil Kumar Alias Anila Alias Layout Anila Vs the State of Karnataka