Disposed¶50

Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Poojary v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Apr 2026CRL.P/15356/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, CRL.P No. 15356 of 2025, decided 22-04-2026 by Justice M. Nagaprasanna; petitioner Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Poojary; State of Karnataka (Malpe Police Station); Crime No.102/2018; C.C.No.731/2024; Sections 384, 507, 506, 34 IPC; anticipatory bail conditions of Crl. Misc. Case No. 40/2025 dated 12-02-2025 (PDJ Udupi); live-location/mobile-tracking bail condition held impermissible and quashed (condition No.7); other bail conditions including Rs.1,00,000/- bond retained; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Condition No.7 of the conditions imposed in the anticipatory bail order (requirement to keep the 'location' turned on in the mobile so as to be available to the Investigating Officer) quashed; all other conditions left undisturbed; petition disposed with the aforesaid observations. ¶50

Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Poojary Vs the State of Karnataka — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶50

Issue for consideration

Whether the condition imposed in the anticipatory bail order directing the petitioner to keep the 'location' turned on in his mobile and share live location with the Investigating Officer can be sustained as a condition for grant of bail, and whether it should be relaxed/quashed.

¶48

Court's answer

The condition directing the petitioner to keep his location on, on his mobile and share the live location with the Investigating Officer cannot be a condition that can be imposed for grant of bail, while the other conditions can be.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, condition No.7 of the anticipatory bail conditions (keeping the 'location' turned on in the mobile so as to be available to the Investigating Officer) stands quashed.

¶49

Key takeaways

All other conditions imposed in the anticipatory bail order cannot be interfered with and therefore remain intact (sentence continues into para 48, identifying the last condition as the sole exception).ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No. 15356 of 2025 (filed u/s 439(1)(b) Cr.P.C. / 483(1)(b) BNSS) before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (M. Nagaprasanna, J.), decided 22 April 2026: the petitioner, facing C.C.No.731/2024 arising out of Crime No.102/2018 of Malpe Police Station (Sections 384, 507, 506 and 34 IPC) pending before the 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Udupi, sought modification/relaxation of the conditions imposed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Udupi while granting anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc. Case No. 40/2025 dated 12/02/2025. The Court found the prayer did not specify which conditions were sought to be relaxed, noted the petitioner's absence on 15.04.2026 and on the last-chance listing, held that the condition requiring the petitioner to keep the 'location' turned on in his mobile and share live location with the Investigating Officer cannot be imposed as a condition for grant of bail, quashed condition No.7, left all other conditions (including execution of a Rs.1,00,000/- bail bond with one surety for like sum) untouched, and disposed of the petition accordingly.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:21739 CRL.P No. 15356 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15356 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHASHI KUMAR @ SHASHI POOJARY S/O VIJAY AMIN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ( AS PER CHARGE SHEET) R/AT GANESH NIVAS, K S RAO NAGAR, KOLNADU MULKI, MULKI MANGALORE CITY - 574 154

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. DILRAJ JUDE ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MALPE POLICE STATION, THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001

¶14

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

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(1)(b) OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 483(1)(b) OF BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO MODIFY/RELAX THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE HONOURABLE COURT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT UDUPI, AT UDUPI WHILE GRANTING THE

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:21739 CRL.P No. 15356 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

RELIEF OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRL. MISC. CASE NO. 40/2025 DATED 12/02/2025 TO THE PETITIONER BY GRANTING TIME TO COMPLY THE SAME IN CONNECTION WITH C.C.NO.731/2024, ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.102/2018 DATED 06/08/2018, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 384, 507, 506 AND 34 OF IPC, PERTAINING TO MALPE POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONOURABLE COURT OF COURT OF 1^ST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN.) AND J.M.F.C. COURT, UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the following

¶24

prayer:

¶25

"Wherefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is most humbly prayed before this Honourable Court that this Honourable court may kindly be please to modify/relax the conditions imposed by the Honourable court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Udupi at Udupi while granting the relief of anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc. Case No.40/2025 dated 12/02/2025 to the petitioner by granting time to comply the same in connection with C. C. No.731/2024, arising out of Crime No. 102/2018 dated 06/08/2018, for the offences punishable under Section 384, 507, 506 and 34 of IPC, pertaining to Malpe Police Station, pending on the file of the Honourable Court of Court of 1^st Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C. Court, Udupi District, Udupi, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶26

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:21739 CRL.P No. 15356 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

The prayer does not indicate what conditions should

¶30

be relaxed. What can be inferred on the perusal of the prayer is all the conditions should be relaxed.

¶31

There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 15.04.2026. The matter was listed today as a last chance. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶32

The bail is granted on certain conditions. The

¶33

conditions imposed are as follows:

¶34

" ORDER

¶35

The petition U/Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.

¶36

In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.102/2018 of Malpe Police Station (C.C. No.731/2024 on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Udupi), he shall be released on bail subject to following conditions:

¶37

(1) He shall execute bail bond for the value of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for like sum.

¶38

(2) He shall not involve in any criminal activities (3) He shall attend the trial regularly, without fail.

¶39

(4) He shall not offer any threat or inducement either to the victim or to the witnesses.

¶40

(5) He shall mark his attendance before the complainant police on second Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. until conclusion of trial in the said case.

¶41

(6) He shall file an affidavit disclosing particulars of his mobile handset and SIM Card being used. In case he is found using either a different handset or the SIM Card, his bai

¶42

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:21739 CRL.P No. 15356 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

bonds stands forfeited forthwith without further reference.

¶46

(7) He shall keep the 'location' turned on in his mobile so as to be available to the Investigating Officer."

¶47

All other conditions cannot be interfered with except

¶48

the last one, which directs the petitioner to keep his location on, on his mobile and share the live location with the Investigating Officer. This cannot be a condition that can be imposed for grant of bail, while other conditions are.

¶49

In that light, the said condition No.7 stands quashed.

¶50

With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed.

¶51

Ordered accordingly.

¶52

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶53

JUDGE

¶54

SJK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 7 CT:SG

Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Poojary v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Poojary 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

Rajesh Joshi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Sundar Anchan Vs Sri. Wahid Khan

Smt. Monica Cruz Vs State of Karnataka

Sushant Tingalaya Vs State of Karnataka

Mr.Hamzala @ Mohammed Hamzal Vs the Station House Officer

Gangadhar Vs State of Karnataka