Dismissed¶¶36

Sri. Sudip Ojha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 Apr 2026CRL.P/2484/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail denied; cybercrime / online fraud; habitual offender with 14 pending cases across India per Cyber Police Portal; Rs. 87,53,552/- involved; IT Act S.66(C), S.66(D); BNS 2023 S.318(4); Crime No.761/2024, FIR dated 08.09.2024, CEN North Crime Police Station, Bengaluru; Session Judge order dated 29.10.2024 upheld; amicus curiae fee Rs.10,000; Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru; Justice E.S. Indiresh; decided 27.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; anticipatory bail refused and petition dismissed. Sole direction: Legal Services Authority to pay Rs.10,000/- legal fee to the amicus curiae. ¶¶36

Sri. Sudip Ojha Vs State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the petitioner; anticipatory bail refused and petition dismissed. Sole direction: Legal Services Authority to pay Rs.10,000/- legal fee to the amicus curiae.

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused in Crime No.761/2024 (offences under S.66(C) and S.66(D) of the IT Act, 2000 and S.318(4) of BNS, 2023), should be granted anticipatory bail despite his alleged antecedents of 14 pending cases.

¶¶24

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail refused: considering the petitioner's antecedents, as there are 14 cases pending against him with respect to his bank account, the petition cannot be accepted and is dismissed.

¶¶36

Ratio / Principle

The learned Session Judge rightly dismissed the petitioner's earlier bail petition by Order dated 29.10.2024; the money involved in the crime as per the complaint being Rs. 87,53,552/- reinforced refusal of bail.

¶¶36

Key takeaways

The Court placed on record the assistance of Smt. Nireeksha D. J. as amicus curiae and directed the Legal Services Authority to pay her a legal fee of Rs.10,000/-; a copy of the order is to be made available to the Karnataka Legal Services Authority for payment.ratio¶¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail refused — cyber-offence case; habitual offender. Criminal Petition under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.761/2024 (FIR dated 08.09.2024, CEN North Crime Police Station, Bengaluru) for offences punishable under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Noting, per the Cyber Police Portal, 14 cases registered across India against the petitioner with respect to his bank account, and that the money involved in the crime as per the complaint was Rs. 87,53,552/-, the Court held that the learned Session Judge had rightly dismissed the earlier petition by Order dated 29.10.2024 and dismissed the petition. The Karnataka Legal Services Authority was directed to pay a legal fee of Rs.10,000/- to Smt. Nireeksha D. J., who appeared as amicus curiae in place of the absent counsel on record.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:23359 CRL.P No. 2484 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2484 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. SUDIP OJHA OJHA FISHERY, S/O KALLPADA OJHA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, TEGRA, NADIA, WEST BENGAL - 741223.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SMT NIREEKSHA D.J.,AMICUS CURIAE) AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CEN CRIME POLICE STATION, NORTH DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560022.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI.RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP)

¶16

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO ORDER GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER, CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE/STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CEN NORTH CRIME POLICE STATION, BENGALURU TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IF ARRESTED IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.761/2024 IN FIR DATED 08.09.2024 FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 66(C) AND 66(D) OF IT ACT AND SEC. 318(4) OF BNS ACT, 2023.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶20

¶21

NC: 2026:KHC:23359 CRL.P No. 2484 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

This petition is under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in respect of the Crime No.761/2024 for the offences punishable under Section 66(C) and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act,2000 and Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶25

Since the learned counsel on record was continuously absent, this court has appointed Smt. Nireeksha D. J., learned counsel as amicus curiae to assist the Court.

¶26

Smt. Nireeksha D.J., the learned counsel as amicus curiae, argued that, the involvement of the petitioner in Crime No. 761/2024 is doubtful and the petitioner is a permanent resident of State of West Bengal and he is having a family. It is also argued by the learned counsel as amicus curiae, for the petitioner that, the FIR filed against the petitioner belatedly to the Registration of the complaint. It is also argued by learned counsel as Amicus curiae that, as the involvement of the

¶27

petitioner in commission of the alleged offence in Crime No. 761/2024 is not forthcoming, the aforementioned proceedings

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23359 CRL.P No. 2484 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

has been initiated erroneously and accordingly sought for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶31

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader,

¶32

appearing for the respondent-State, pointed out that already there are 14 cases lodged against the petitioner that are pending consideration and therefore the petitioner being a habitual offender as per the Cyber Police Portal, at this stage, he cannot be granted anticipatory bail and therefore sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶33

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, though the learned amicus curiae argued for granting anticipatory bail on the ground that the petitioner is not involved in the alleged crime in Crime No.761/2024, pending on the file of the North CEN Crime Police Station and also argued that the petitioner is a proprietor of Ojha Fisheries and is having a business since 2024, however looking into the antecedents of the petitioner, as already there are 14 cases registered across India with respect to the bank account of the petitioner as per the Cyber Police Portal and the money involved in the crime as per the complaint is to the time

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:23359 CRL.P No. 2484 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

of Rs. 87,53,552/-, I am of the view that, learned Session Judge has rightly dismissed the petition by Order dated 29.10.2024 and that apart on careful consideration of the entire papers, I am of the opinion that, as there are 14 cases pending against the petitioner with respect to the bank account of the petitioner, the petition cannot be accepted and accordingly petition is dismissed.

¶37

This Court placed on record the assistance rendered by Smt. Nireeksha D. J. as an amicus curiae in the matter, and Accordingly, the Legal Services Authority is directed to pay the legal fee of Rs.10,000/- to the amicus curiae for assisting the Court.

¶38

Copy of the same is to be made available to the Karnataka Legal Services Authority for payment of the legal fee to Smt. Nireeksha D. J. as an amicus curiae

¶39

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶40

¶41

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Sri. Sudip Ojha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Sudip Ojha 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

Sri. Manjegowda Vs Joint Director of Co. Operative Societies

Smt.Poornima Vs the Principal

Sri Sathish K R Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Manjuganapathi K Vs State of Karnataka by

Narendra Kumar B R Vs the Managing Director

Smt. Chandralekha Anand Shetty Vs M/S Hariprasad