- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 280 OF 2025 BETWEEN: DEV SHARMA S/O R.P. SHARMA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/O INDIGO 605, H.M. WORLD CITY APARTMENT, NEAR VINAYAKA THEATRE, J P NAGAR PHASE-9 BANGALORE - 560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHASHANK SHEKHAR JHA, ADV., FOR SRI GAURAV H.S, ADV.) AND: 1. 2. STATE BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER INDIARA NAGAR POLICE STATION BANGALORE CITY 560 038 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. (REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) B'LORE - 01. JAHNAVI G ACCOUNTANT OF OPTIMIZORY RESOURCES PVT. LTD., #164, 9TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN HOYSALA NAGAR, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE - 38. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI AMAR CORREA, ADV., FOR R-2) Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ORDER THE PETITIONER TO BE ENLARGED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.194/2024 REGISTERED IN INDIRANAGAR P.S., PENDING BEFORE 10th ACMM COURT, MAYOHALL, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 66(C) AND 66(D) OF IT ACT, SEC.420 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. This petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, is filed by accused no.3 in Crime No.194/2024 registered by Indiranagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 420 of IPC, apprehending arrest in the said case. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.194/2024 was registered by Indiranagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the aforesaid offences against Franklin George based on the first information dated 18.07.2024 received from respondent no.2. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioner had filed Crl. Misc. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 No.25760/2024 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court which was rejected on 13.09.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition, submits that the alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and the maximum punishment for the said offences is imprisonment for a period of seven years. Petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the police for the purpose of investigation. Accused nos.1 & 2 have been granted regular bail by the Trial Court and it is only thereafter, respondent no.2 has been making unnecessary allegations against the petitioner. He also submits that no allegations are found against the petitioner in the first information and only in the further statement of the complainant, allegations are made against the petitioner. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP and the learned Counsel for respondent no.2 who have filed their statement objections, have strongly opposed the petition. They submit that petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and on similar allegations Vanrai Police Station of Mumbai, have registered FIR in Crime - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 No.405/2024 against the petitioner and others. They submit that there is material to show that from the alleged fraud, a sum of Rs.One Crore has been transferred to the account of the petitioner and a sum of Rs.29 lakhs has been transferred to the account of his wife who is also arrayed as an accused in the present case. Petitioner and his wife have not been cooperating for the purpose of investigation. Even in the criminal registered in Mumbai, he is absconding. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary since he is the master mind of the fraud committed. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition. 6. In the first information that was submitted by respondent no.2, it is mentioned that petitioner had joined their company in the month of June 2023 and had introduced customers through Franklin George who was introduced as an employee of ABIS group. It was represented by the petitioner and Franklin George that the business transaction will happen through a company known as 'Prem Care' which was a registered vendor of ABIS Exports. The allegation in the first information is that though the first informant company had deployed vehicle to ABIS exports, payments were not received from the said - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 company and on inquiry with the said company, it came to their notice that payments were already made to companies known as Prem Care and Eagle Enterprises. It is under said circumstances, respondent no.2 had approached the police. 7. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that petitioner is the person who had set up the aforesaid two companies known as Prem Care and Eagle Enterprises and payments which were received from ABIS Exports to the account of the aforesaid two companies was thereafter misappropriated by the petitioner and other accused persons including his wife. 8. Learned Counsel for respondent no.2 has submitted that out of the total misappropriated amount, a sum of Rs.One Crore was transferred to the account of the petitioner and another sum of Rs.29 lakhs was transferred to the account of his wife. He has produced material before this Court which would go to show that petitioner is arrayed as accused no.1 in Crime No.405/2024 registered by Vanrai Police Station, Mumbai, wherein similar allegations are made against the petitioner and other accused persons for the offences - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 punishable under Sections 406, 419, 120B, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 & 420 IPC. In the said case, the alleged fraud is to the tune of Rs.4,44,00,000/-. In the present case, the alleged fraud is to the tune of Rs.9,02,62,068/-. It appears that during the course of investigation, police have filed requisition before the Trial Court seeking permission to invoke the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 465, 467, 468, 471, 473 IPC in the present case and the Trial Court has granted permission to invoke the aforesaid offences against the accused in the present case. 9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that in Crime No.405/2024, till date he has not been granted bail. Petitioner as well as his wife who are arrayed as accused in the present case, allegedly have not been cooperating with the police for the purpose of investigation. 10. The material on record would go to show that accused no.2 - Dharmendra Kumar Jha was introduced to the first informant as Franklin George, and therefore, it is apparent that from the inception, petitioner had the intention to cheat the first informant company. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:9869 CRL.P No. 280 of 2025 11. Considering the nature of allegations found against the petitioner and his wife, his custodial interrogation may be necessary. Having regard to the said aspect and also taking into consideration his past history, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail cannot be granted. Accused Nos.1 and 2, who were arrested have been granted regular bail and therefore, no parity can be extended to the petitioner, who is seeking anticipatory bail. Accordingly, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK