- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7300 CRL.P No. 101802 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101802 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS) BETWEEN: HUSSENPEERAN S/O. MAHAMMADGOUSE MAKANDAR, AGE 55 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. KHASIM KHAN MASJID ONI, SAVANUR, HAVERI-581118. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SADIK KANVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CEN PS HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI, REPRESENTED BY THE SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C. (U/SEC. 482 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO. 06/2023 OF CEN CRIME PS, HAVERI, REGISTERED AS CC NO. 56/2024 BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HAVERI FOR OFFENCE U//S.201 OF IPC AND 67B IT ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7300 CRL.P No. 101802 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short, “the Cr.P.C.”] praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.6/2023 of CEN Crime Police Station, Haveri for the offences punishable under sections 201 of IPC and Section 67(B) of IT Act. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under: 4. The case has been registered against the accused alleging that he uploaded obscene videos of children in facebook, a social media through his mobile phone and deleted them. Thus, during the course of investigation, Police issued a notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and secured his presence. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences. Soon after filing of the charge sheet, the Trial Court took cognizance and issued summons to the accused. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7300 CRL.P No. 101802 of 2025 Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent – Police and anticipating that the Trial Court may remand him to judicial custody, the petitioner preferred an anticipatory bail petition in Criminal Miscellaneous No.158/2025 before the Learned Principal District Judge, Haveri. However, the learned Principal District Judge rejected the petition on 22.03.2025. Accordingly, the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the petition and submits that the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail application for the reason that there is no apprehension of arrest and accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. A case has been registered against the accused on the accusation that he uploaded obscene videos of children in face book, a social media through his mobile phone and deleted them. The offences punishable under Section 201 of IPC and Section 67(B) of IT Act are non-bailable in nature. The learned Magistrate after receipt of charge sheet took cognizance of the offences and has issued summons to the petitioner. The petitioner is aged about 55 years apprehending arrest in the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7300 CRL.P No. 101802 of 2025 case had approached the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Haveri in Criminal Miscellaneous No.158/2025, which was dismissed on 22.03.2025 on the ground that, since the learned Magistrate has issued summons there cannot be any apprehension of arrest and accordingly, dismissed the petition. 7. Considering the fact that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the alleged offences which are non-bailable in nature, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner cannot be said to be misconceived. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mahdoom Bava vs. Central Bureau of Investigation1 in almost similar circumstances has observed that in the event the party expresses that there is a likelihood of the Court remanding him/her to judicial custody, then such apprehensions cannot be said to be totally misconceived. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail needs to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following: 1 2023 SCC OnLine SC 299 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7300 CRL.P No. 101802 of 2025 ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent – Police on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/SHO. iii. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv. The petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons. v. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. vi. The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RSH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14