- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6958 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)-) BETWEEN: SRI. GOPAL SHEDABALKAR S/O. GANGAPPA SHEDABALKAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT: HALLUR VILLAGE, BELGAUM - 591 312. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. RAM SINGH, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE BY KARNATAKA BY CCB POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M M., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.75/2024 BY C.C.B BANGALORE CITY POLICE O/P/U/S 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 318(4) R/W 3(5) OF BNS, 2023 PENDING LEARNED I ACJM, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 seeking for anticipatory bail in Crime No.75/2024, registered by the C.C.B Bengaluru Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others stating that his nephew by name, Mirza Nemath Ulla Huq, was working as a supervisor at Prestige Group. He had studied upto 10th standard and intended to pursue further studies through distance education. At his request, the complainant searched on Google for information regarding the distance education. He notified that there is a distance education academy, namely, Mercury Academy Distance Education situated at the address as mentioned in the complaint. Therefore, the complainant approached the person who is in-charge of Mercury Academy Distance Education. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 3. Accused No.1-Monish had informed the complainant that without writing the examination, he could arrange all types of marks cards from any University for a price of Rs.2.00 lakhs. Believing his words, the complainant initially paid Rs.10,000/- as an advance through G-Pay and thereafter, he paid Rs.20,000/- and later, he paid 5,000/-. 4. Subsequently, accused No.1 had given photocopies of the hall ticket and marks card in the name of his nephew. After examining the said documents, the complainant was surprised to see that his niece had passed the 2nd PUC examination in the year 2018 itself. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered against the said Institution and others. 5. Upon the said complaint, the respondent-Police registered a case in Crime No.75/2024 against Monish and others for the offences punishable as stated supra. The present petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in the remand application. Having a reasonable apprehension about his arrest, he has approached this Court by filing the present criminal petition seeking anticipatory bail. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 6. Heard Sri K Ram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Waheeda M.M, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has not committed any offences. He is no way connected to the case of the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated on the strength of the statement of the co- accused. Even without any cogent evidence, he has been arrayed as an accused which is baseless and not relevant. 8. It is further stated that, the alleged incident stated to have taken place at Bengaluru, however, the petitioner is a resident of Belgaum. Similar relief has already been granted by the Trial Court to other accused persons, namely, accused No.1 and accused No.4 who are similarly placed. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 9. Per Contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that the respondent police have busted - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 the fake marks card racket. The manner in which they were deceiving innocent people by producing fake marks card clearly would indicate that they had knowledge and intention to commit the offence. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Making such submissions, she prays to dismiss the petition. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint and also the other documents on record, it is noted that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail. The name of the petitioner appears in the remand application on the strength of the statement of the co-accused. Obviously, the statement of the co-accused when he was in police custody, cannot be acceptable. 11. Having considered the above aspect, it is appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution and also the investigating officer. 12. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.75/2024 registered by respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023 pending on the file of the learned 1st A.C.J.M., Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdiction police. (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police within one month from today to execute the bond and also the surety. (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police on fortnightly Saturday between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and he has to affix his signature till filing of the charge sheet. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18310 CRL.P No. 6958 of 2025 (iv) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. (v) The petitioner shall not commit similar offences till disposal of the case. (vi) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (vii) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the jurisdictional Police Station forthwith. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45 CT:SK