Mr. Akbar Salam Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO.163/2025 REGISTERED BY THE MANGALURU EAST POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 316(2), 316(5), 318(2). 318(3) READ WITH 3(5) OF B.N.S. PENDING ON THE FILE OF 6TH J.M.F.C COURT. MANGALURU. D.K DISTRICT AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, EQUITY AND LAW.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:13879 CRL.P No. 800 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.13, is before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.163/2025 of respondent-police for the offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(2), 318(3) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶34

Brief facts of the case:

¶35

The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint came to be registered by the Chief Manager of State Bank of India, Mallikatte Branch, Kadri, Mangalore, contending that, during 2024, an internal audit of the Bank was conducted. During the said period, the Auditor has raised objection regarding non-payment of loans given to the customers. On verifying the loans sanctioned to the customers, it was noticed that, some of the customers were not repaying the loans promptly. Consequently, a huge loss was sustained to the Bank. Hence, the complaint has been filed by the complainant, who was working as the Chief Manager of State Bank of India. After registering the case, the investigation is going on.

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:13879 CRL.P No. 800 of 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Heard Sri S. Rajashekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rangaswamy R., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State.

¶40

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a businessman, who is doing business of plywood and home appliance manufacturing business. It is true that, he had availed the loan from the Bank. However, he did not pay the installments as he was not in a position to pay the loan amount due to some financial crisis. The petitioner had availed the loan on providing proper security. In case if the petitioner fails to pay the loan, there are other avenues available to the Bank to recover the same. However, the Bank has taken drastic step to recover the amount by filing the criminal petition, which is an abuse of process of law. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:13879 CRL.P No. 800 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State vehemently submitted that, many customers who availed the loans were not repaying the loans and also with an intention to deceive the Bank, intentionally avoiding in making payments. In fact, the documents of which the petitioner and others had produced as security are not sufficient to indemnify the loss sustained to the Bank. The transactions are deceitful transactions. In fact, investigation is under progress. A detailed investigation is to be carried out. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.

¶45

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the averments of the complaint, it appears from the record that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.13. It is alleged against him that he had availed the loan of a sum of Rs.1,25,00,000/- on 08.11.2023. Thereafter, on 02.12.2024, he became a defaulter. Merely because he became a defaulter that would not be

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:13879 CRL.P No. 800 of 2026

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

sufficient to hold that he had an intention to deceive the Bank and to commit fraud. Having considered the said aspect, it is appropriate to grant him anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶49

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶52

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be

¶53

enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest, in Crime No.163/2025 of respondent-police for the offences stated supra , on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶54

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one month from today, to execute a personal bond and also to furnish surety.

¶55