S.Sangamesh Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGING THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.88/2025 REGISTERED BY HULSURU GATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 318(4), 336(2), 340(2) OF BNS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE VTH ADDL. CJM, COURT AT BENGALURU.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER

¶20

WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶22

2 -

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC:19085 CRL.P No. 6824 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Accused no.2 in Crime No.88/2025 registered by Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023, is before this Court under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

¶27

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶28

FIR in Crime No.88/2025 was registered by Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the aforesaid offences against Sangamesh Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., and the petitioner herein based on the first information dated 05.04.2025 received from Pradeep Devanur - Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Bengaluru. Apprehending arrest in the case, petitioner had filed Crl. Misc. No.3075/2025 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected on 21.04.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶29

Learned Counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition, submits that accused no.1 who is the wife of the petitioner was arrested in the present case and

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19085 CRL.P No. 6824 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

she has been enlarged on regular bail. The alleged offences are triable by the court of Magistrate and the maximum punishment is imprisonment for a period of seven years. Petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the police for the purpose of investigation. He is a married man having children. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra. learned HCGP has opposed the petition on the ground that material on record would prima facie go to show that the accused persons have committed the alleged offences and to verify the source of fraudulent fixed deposit receipts produced by the accused persons along with their tender document, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Petitioner is the person who has submitted the tender along with fraudulent documents. He is a person with criminal antecedents. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶34

Perusal of the first information submitted by the Executive Engineer of Public Works Department, Bengaluru, would go to show that petitioner had participated in the tender called for by the Public Works Department and along with the tender document, the petitioner had produced certain fixed

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:19085 CRL.P No. 6824 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

deposit receipts which was one of the requirement as per the terms and conditions of the tender for the purpose of participating in the tender. It appears that the work was allotted to the petitioner, and subsequently, it was found that the fixed deposit receipts submitted by the petitioner along with his tender documents were forged. The fixed deposit receipts were allegedly issued by Canara Bank, Siddalingapura Branch, Mysuru Road, and on verification, the Canara Bank has issued a clarification, which reads as under:

¶38

"Kindly go through the attached FD receipts. There is no such branch named: Siddalingapura in our Mysore RO. The subject DP is also not available in our director. On scrutinizing the receipt it is observed that no such FD account number is found in CBS and the email ID mentioned at the end of the deposit receipt is not our official email ID. The receipt appears to be forged."

¶39

From the aforesaid, it is apparent that the alleged offences prima facie get attracted against the accused persons. As rightly contended by the learned HCGP, the source of forged fixed deposit receipts which have been produced by the accused persons along with the tender document is required to

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:19085 CRL.P No. 6824 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

be traced and the involvement of other persons who have provided the forged fixed deposit receipts to the accused persons is also required to be found out apparent. According to the prosecution, it is the petitioner who has submitted the tender documents along with the forged fixed deposit receipts on behalf of Sangamesh Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., which is owned by the petitioner and his wife.

¶43

It is brought to the notice of this Court that petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and FIR in Crime No.2/2025 was earlier registered against him by Vidhana Soudha Police Station, Bengaluru, based on the first information submitted by Poornima Nelagalli who is working as Assistant Executive Engineer in Public Works Department. The work order issued to the accused is available on record and the same is signed on behalf of the accused company by the petitioner herein. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the present case having regard to the seriousness of the allegations found and also to find out the involvement of other accused persons.

¶44