Mr Ummar Kavunja Vs the State of Karnataka

MR UMMAR KAVUNJA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O ABUBAKKAR BEARY, R/AT NO. 2-61, KARVUNJA HOUSE, SULYAPADAVU POST, PADAVANNURU, PUTTUR TQ D.K DISTRICT-574 313.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. RAJARAMA S, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UPPINANGADY POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST BY THE UPPINAGADY POLICE IN CRIME No.0084/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 417, 419, 467, 468 AND 471 OF IPC.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:9309 CRL.P No. 16873 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section

¶25

482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.84/2025 of Uppinangadi Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 417, 419, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and

¶27

learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the name of this petitioner is not shown in the FIR/complaint as accused. The petitioner apprehends his arrest as he has received notice from the Investigating Officer to appear for investigation. The name of the petitioner has been mentioned in the remand application of Abdul Hashim. In the said remand application,

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:9309 CRL.P No. 16873 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

allegation against this petitioner is that this petitioner and

¶32

one Mohammed Ali have created the affidavit of the surety and asked Abdul Hashim to affix signature on it and stand as surety to Sayed Mohammed Nashib. The petitioner is not involved in commission of any offence as alleged. The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. The offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With this, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra , learned High Court Government

¶34

Pleader for the respondent –State would contend that the allegation against this petitioner is that he and Mohammed Ali have created affidavit and document and made Abdul Hashim to affix signature on the affidavit and stand as surety to Sayed Mohammed Nashib and committed the

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:9309 CRL.P No. 16873 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

offence as alleged. The petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. With this, he prays to reject the petition.

¶39

Having heard learned counsels, the Court has

¶40

perused FIR, complaint, remand application, and other materials placed on record.

¶41

The name of this petitioner has been mentioned in the remand application of Abdul Hashim. The said Abdul Hashim, this petitioner and Mohammed Ali have prepared the affidavit and accused affixed his fake signature on it and stood as surety to Sayed Mohammed Nashib. What is the exact role of this petitioner in creating such forged fabricated affidavit of surety is required to be ascertained in the investigation. The offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner has undertaken to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. The petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:9309 CRL.P No. 16873 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

has made out case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions.

¶45

In the result, the following

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i) The petition is allowed.

¶48

ii) The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.84/2025 of Uppinangadi Police Station subject to following conditions:

¶49

a) The petitioner –accused shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from this day and execute a bail bond for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶50

6 -

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:9309 CRL.P No. 16873 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

b) The petitioner –accused shall appear before

¶54

the Investigating Officer whenever called for and co-operate for investigation.

¶55

c) The petitioner –accused shall not directly or indirectly make an inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such a facts to the court or police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶56

d) The petitioner –accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Sunday between 10 a.m. and 02 p.m. for a period of

¶57

02 months or till filing of the final report

¶58

whichever is earlier.

¶59

DSP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9

¶60

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

Mr Ummar Kavunja v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Ummar Kavunja 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

Sri. Madhuraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Ajith Sha Vs State of Karnataka

Kiran Kumar. K. N. Vs State by Women Police Station

Sri Pradeepa C Vs the State of Karnataka

Vikas Kumar Vs State by Sadashivanagar Ps

Sri. Kiran. v Vs State of Karnataka