Sri.Pradeep M v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Jul 2025CRL.P/9026/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim custody/release of seized vehicle; substitution of Bank Guarantee with indemnity bond; Section 503 BNSS; Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C.; Section 482 Cr.P.C.; Section 528 BNSS; financial condition/incapacity of claimant; value of vehicle; Crime No.61/2025 Channapatna Rural Police; Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Channapatna; vehicle Regn. No. KA-02-AF-7475; conditions of release; Mahazar; quashing of condition; Karnataka High Court 2025.

What did the court decide?

Setting aside of Condition No.1 (Bank Guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/-) imposed by the Trial Court; petitioner directed to execute an indemnity bond of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the respondent, upon which the vehicle (Regn. No. KA-02-AF-7475) is to be released forthwith; remaining conditions of the impugned order to remain intact. ¶¶47

Sri.Pradeep M Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether Condition No.1 of the impugned order requiring the petitioner to furnish a Bank Guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- should be relaxed and substituted with an indemnity bond, given the petitioner's financial condition and the vehicle's value of about Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶¶38

Court's answer

Considering the petitioner's financial condition and the fact that the value of the vehicle directed to be released is only around Rs.1,00,000/-, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to substitute Condition No.1 by directing the petitioner to execute an indemnity bond instead of furnishing a Bank Guarantee.

¶¶44

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order's requirement that the petitioner furnish a Bank Guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- is set aside.

¶¶49

Key takeaways

Instead of the Bank Guarantee, the petitioner is directed to execute an indemnity bond of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the respondent at the time of obtaining release of the vehicle.ratio¶¶50
The remaining conditions imposed in the impugned order dated 02.05.2025 passed in C.R.No.61/2025 shall remain intact.ratio¶¶53
Immediately upon the petitioner executing the indemnity bond of Rs.1,00,000/-, the respondent shall release the subject vehicle in favour of the petitioner forthwith without any delay.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar, single Judge) allowed Criminal Petition No. 9026 of 2025, filed under S.482 Cr.P.C / S.528 BNSS by Sri.Pradeep M., challenging Condition No.1 of the order dated 02.05.2025 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapatna in Crime No.61/2025 of Channapatna Rural Police Station. The Trial Court had allowed the petitioner's application under Section 503 BNSS (Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C) for interim release of his Bajaj Passenger Auto 3 W Pass bearing Registration No.KA-02-AF-7475, subject inter alia to execution of a Bank Guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/-. Having regard to the petitioner's financial condition and the fact that the value of the vehicle was only around Rs.1,00,000/-, the High Court set aside the Bank Guarantee condition and directed the petitioner to execute an indemnity bond of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the respondent at the time of obtaining release of the vehicle; the remaining conditions of the impugned order were left intact, and the respondent was directed to release the vehicle forthwith upon execution of the indemnity bond.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:24291 CRL.P No. 9026 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9026 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI.PRADEEP M., S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT MUNGADAHALLI VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DIST.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. H. V. SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CHANNAPATNA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHANNAPATNA, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 1.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. B. N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CONDITION NO.1 IMPOSED ON THE PETITIONER VIDE ORDER DATED 02.05.2025 IN CRIME NO.61/2025 OF CHANNAPATNA RURAL POLICE ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHANNAPATNA THEREBY ORDER TO RELEASE THE VEHICLE/AUTO BEARING REGN NO. KA-02-AF-7475 IN FAVOUR OF THE INTERIM CUSTODY OF THE PETITIONER BY ACCEPTING SURETY IN LIEU OF BANK GUARANTEE.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:24291 CRL.P No. 9026 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

¶25

“Wherefore, the petitioner above named most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the condition No.1 imposed on the petitioner vide order dated 02.05.2025 in Crime No.61/2025 of Channapatna Rural Police on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Channapatna, thereby order to release the vehicle/Auto bearing Regn.No.KA-02-AF-7475 in favour of the interim custody of the petitioner by accepting surety in lieu of Bank Guarantee for the reasons stated above, in the ends of justice and equity.”

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶27

counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

¶28

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner herein filed an application under Section 503 BNSS (Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C) seeking release of Bajaj Passenger Auto 3 W Pass bearing Registration No.KA-02-AF-7475. By the impugned order dated 02.05.2025

¶29

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:24291 CRL.P No. 9026 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

passed in C.R.No.61/2025, the Trial Court allowed the matter by imposing the following conditions:

¶33

The claimant shall execute Bank Guarantee for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶34

The claimant shall not change the colour and nature of the said vehicle.

¶35

The claimant shall produce the same before the Court whenever called.

¶36

The claimant shall not alienate the said vehicle without permission of the Court till disposal of this case.

¶37

The S.H.O shall draw the Mahazar in this regard in the presence of two witnesses and in turn the I.O is directed to produce the Mahazar, photographs and compact disc before the Court.

¶38

The limited grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that having regard to the fact that the petitioner does not have means or resources to furnish Bank Guarantee due to his financial condition, Condition No.1 of the impugned order calling upon the petitioner to furnish the Bank Guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/-

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:24291 CRL.P No. 9026 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

may be relaxed and instead, petitioner may be directed to execute indemnity bond since the value of the vehicle is only Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

¶43

case, having regard to the fact that the financial condition of the petitioner coupled with the fact that the value of the vehicle directed

¶44

to be released is only around Rs.1,00,000/-, I deem it just and appropriate to substitute condition No.1 by directing the petitioner to execute indemnity bond instead of furnishing Bank Guarantee and issue further directions in this regard.

¶45

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i) The petition is hereby allowed.

¶48

ii) The impugned order insofar as the

¶49

petitioner to furnish Bank Guarantee in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- is concerned, is hereby set aside and instead the petitioner is directed to execute indemnity

¶50

bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the respondent at the time of obtaining release of the vehicle.

¶51

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:24291 CRL.P No. 9026 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

iii) Remaining conditions imposed in the impugned order dated 02.05.2025 passed in C.R.No.61/2025 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapattana, shall remain in tact.

¶54

iv) Immediately upon the petitioner executing indemnity bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, the respondent shall release the subject vehicle in favour of the petitioner forthwith without any delay.

¶55

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶56

MDS

¶57

List No.: 5 Sl No.: 17

Sri.Pradeep M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Pradeep M v. the 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

Srinivas Hejamadi Tati Vs Well Doc Software Pvt. Ltd.

Mr. Mohan Kumar Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri. Abdul Rahiman Vs State by Buntwal Rural

Shrikanth M Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs. Franzy Gonsalves Vs Mr. Tabraiz Sheriff Shaikh

Mrs. Frenzy Gonsalves Vs Mr. Tabraiz Sheriff Shaikh