- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12340 CRL.P No. 2869 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2869 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ABEDNEGO S/O DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/A NO 1/B, SANJEVAPPA LAYOUT, 10TH I CROSS, NAGAWARAPALYA C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560093 2. SRI SAMUEL S/O DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/A NO 1/B, SANJEVAPPA LAYOUT, 10TH I CROSS, NAGAWARAPALYA C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560093 3. SRI DEVARAJ S/O LATE TULUKHAM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/A NO 1/B, SANJEVAPPA LAYOUT, 10TH I CROSS, NAGAWARAPALYA C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560093 4. SMT VIJAYA W/O DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/A NO 1/B, SANJEVAPPA LAYOUT, 10TH I CROSS, NAGAWARAPALYA Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12340 CRL.P No. 2869 of 2024 C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560093 5. SMT VIDA JOTHI W/O VIJAYA RAJAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A NO 1/B, SANJEVAPPA LAYOUT, 10TH I CROSS, NAGAWARAPALYA C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560093 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAUSHAD PASHA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY ASHOKNAGAR PS BENGALURU - 560050 REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE - 560001 2. SRI. MOHAN KUMAR H SHERISTEDAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, X ADDL. C.M.M., COURT MAYOHALL M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP.) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2024 IN PCR NO.55464/2018, VIDE C.C.NO.33631/2018, VIDE ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY V A.C.M.M COURT AT BENGALURU AND DISCHARGE/ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS /ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFECE P/U/S 419,420,465,466,468,471,484 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12340 CRL.P No. 2869 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent-State. 2. The petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 5 have been implicated in the present case on the allegation that, in connivance with accused No. 6, they fabricated court orders and, based on those fabricated orders, secured their release on bail. Whether the accused had knowledge of the fabricated court order is a matter to be considered at the time of trial. 3. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. 4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. All contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14