Sri Narasimha Murthy Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:26992 CRL.P No. 9097 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9097 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.58, HEROHALLI VILLAGE, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 091.

¶9

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

SRI ANJANAPPA, S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.58, HEROHALLI VILLAGE, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 091.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. A.K. VASANTHA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BYADARAHALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 091,

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:26992 CRL.P No. 9097 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

REPRESENTED BY IT'S STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO DIRECT HIM TO RELEASE ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST BY THE BYADARAHALLI POLICE IN C.C.NO.133/2021 (CRIME NO.224/2019) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 427, 447, 448, 465, 468 AND 471 OF IPC., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT WOULD DEEM FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶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 Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.133/2021 pending

¶26

before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District arising out of Crime No.224/2019 registered by the Byadarahalli Police Station, Bangalore for the

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:26992 CRL.P No. 9097 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

offences punishable under Sections 420, 427, 447, 448, 465, 468, 471 of IPC are before this Court under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CPC) seeking anticipatory bail.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were earlier granted anticipatory bail by the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.2087/2019 on 20.12.2019. Since the petitioners have not complied the conditions imposed in the said bail order, the trial Court thereafter issued non-bailable warrant against them. Apprehending arrest, petitioners had filed Crl.Misc.No.106/2025 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court which was rejected on 04.02.2025. Therefore, they are before this Court.

¶33

Per contra, learned High Court Government

¶34

Pleader who has opposed the petition does not dispute the

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:26992 CRL.P No. 9097 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

submission made by the learned counsel for the

¶38

petitioners.

¶39

Perusal of the first information as well as charge sheet allegations would go to show that dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. Appreciating this aspect of the matter, the petitioners were earlier granted anticipatory bail in the present case by the jurisdictional Court of Sessions Judge in Crl.Misc.No.2087/2019 disposed on 20.12.2019. It appears that petitioners had not complied the conditions imposed in Crl.Misc.No.2087/2019 and also had not appeared before the trial Court and therefore, coercive steps were taken against them. It is under these circumstances, they apprehend arrest in the case. Be that as it may, the fact remains on merits of the case, petitioners were earlier granted bail in the present case and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, their custodial interrogation is not required in the present case. The maximum punishment for the aforesaid offences is

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:26992 CRL.P No. 9097 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

imprisonment for a period of seven years. Petitioners who

¶43

are agriculturist do not have any criminal antecedents. Since the petitioners were earlier granted anticipatory bail in the present petition, their second anticipatory bail application cannot be entertained.

¶44

Under the circumstances, this petition is

¶45

disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to surrender before the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate and file necessary application seeking regular bail / recall of NBW.

¶46

If such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned Court on the same day.

¶47

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶48

VMB

¶49

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59

Sri Narasimha Murthy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Narasimha Murthy 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

Sanjay Vs State by Koratagere Police Station

Nayaz Pasha Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Syed Shoaib Vs State of Karnataka by

Mr. Madan @ Abhith Vs State of Karnataka

Kiran N v Vs the State of Karnataka

Syed Salman Vs State of Karnataka