Sathish Vs State of Karnataka

SATHISH S/O MAHABALA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS SUPERVIOSR R/AT M.CHANDANNA NILAYA, KALIDASANAGARA CHIKKAMGALURU - 577 101 (AS PER ORDER SHEET) SATHISH B AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LATE B.MAHABALA SHETTY C/O D.P LOKE GOWDA CHANDANNA NILAYA, OPPS DA SCHOOL KALIDASA NAGAR, CHIKMAGALUR CHIKMAGALUR, CHIKKAMAGLUR KARNATAKA - 577 101.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI P.E. SURESH, ADV. A/W SRI UTSAV GOWDA P.S, ADV.)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RURAL P.S, CHIKKAMAGALURU REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL FOR THE O/P/US/ 406,408,418,420 R/W 34 OF IPC IN CR.NO.15/2024 REGISTERED BY RURAL P.S CHIKKAMAGALURU ON THE FILE OF I ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHIKKAMAGALURU.

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:24794 CRL.P No. 8800 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Accused no.1 in Crime No.15/2024 registered by Chickmagalur Rural Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 418, 420 read with 34 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.PC seeking regular bail.

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶27

FIR in Crime No.15/2025 was registered by Chickmagalur Rural Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner and two others based on the first information received on 07.01.2024 from Ahmed Shihabuddien - Manager of the Company known as 'Louis Dreyfus Company India Pvt. Ltd.', Piriyapatna Taluk, Mysuru District. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioner had filed application seeking anticipatory bail before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected. Thereafter, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.1746/2024, which was

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:24794 CRL.P No. 8800 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

rejected on 15.03.2024 reserving liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the Trial Court and file necessary application seeking regular bail. Though the petitioner had surrendered before the learned Magistrate and filed necessary application seeking regular bail, the learned Magistrate had refused to take him to custody nor was his application entertained. Therefore, petitioner had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.5351/2025 which was disposed of on 22.04.2025 reserving liberty to the petitioner to appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate and file necessary application seeking regular bail. It was observed that in the event petitioner surrenders before the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate and files necessary application seeking regular bail, the said application shall be considered on its merits and disposed of on the same day. The bail application filed by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate was dismissed. Thereafter, petitioner had approached the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.233/2025 which was rejected on 17.06.2025. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

¶32

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that in the typed complaint which is filed by the Manager of the

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:24794 CRL.P No. 8800 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

company, it is stated that totally coffee beans weighing 58.772

¶36

MTs was stolen from the company and the company had suffered loss to the tune of Rs.1,24,96,447/-. Accused nos.1 & 2 were allegedly working as Supervisors in the aforesaid company and accused no.3 was working as Assistant Supervisor.

¶37

In the first information, it is stated that petitioner had admitted that he was responsible for the theft of coffee beans totally weighing 23.216 MTs. However, the total coffee beans which was stolen from the company was 58.772 MTs. Accused nos.2 & 3 have been granted anticipatory bail in the present

¶38

case by the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.47/2024 disposed of on 06.02.2024. The allegation as against accused nos.1 & 2 appears to be identical. Accused no.1 who is the petitioner herein is in custody from 26.05.2025 onwards. The alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and the maximum punishment for the said offences is imprisonment for a period of seven years. Undisputedly, petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that petitioner's prayer for

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:24794 CRL.P No. 8800 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:

¶43

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.15/2024 registered by Chickmagalur Rural Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 418, 420 read with 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶44

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶45

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶46

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶47

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶48

6 -

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:24794 CRL.P No. 8800 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶52

Sd /- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶53

KK

Sathish v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathish 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

Prudvi Raj Vaddadi @ Pruthvi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Sanjay T. D. Vs State of Karnataka

Aruna K Vs the State of Karnataka

Arjun Singh Vs State by Women Police Station

Nagaraju @ Venkataraju @ Kodli Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Darshan Vs State by Karnataka