- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10806 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. SRINATH JOSHI MAHADEV IPS S/O MR. MAHADEV, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O AT NO.808, 8TH FLOOR, PRESTIGE ST. JOHN'S WOOD, TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKER ADUGODI, BENGALURU 560 029. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SREENIVASA., ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE BANGALORE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, M. S. BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH FIR IN CR.NO.28/2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A DATED 02.06.2025 AND COMPLAINT IN ANNEXURE B DATED 30.05.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned senior counsel Sri. sandesh J. Chouta, for Sri. Sampreeth, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Special Prosecutor Sri. Venkatesh S. Arbatti for respondent-Lokayukta Police. 2. Perused the material on record. 3. Petitioner, not named as an accused in the FIR registered by Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Bengaluru City, in Crime No.28/2025, is before this Court in this petition under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail. 4. FIR is registered on a complaint lodged by the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bengaluru against one Ningappa Savantha and others, for the offence Punishable under Section 7(A), 7(a) of the P.C. Act, 1988. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 5. AS per complaint, some unknown persons impersonating as Lokayukta officials were extracting money from the public servants. It is alleged that the accused by name Ningappa Savantha, used to contact the officials of various departments allegedly claiming that he has contact with Lokayukta officials and telling them, if the money is not paid, he will get raids conducted and have them arrested. 6. Petitioner, then working as Superintendent of Police, Lokayukta, received a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 to participate in the enquiry. It is submitted that on 15.06.2025, i.e., on the date of issuance of notice, search was conducted in the house of petitioner, wherein, cash of Rs.32,000/- and 189 grams of gold were found. The said articles were, however, returned to him. 7. Petitioner apprehending his arrest filed an application seeking anticipatory bail before the Special Court in Crl.Misc.No.5060/2025. In the meanwhile, he filed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 W.P.No.17564/2025 for quashing of the proceedings. This Court was pleased to grant an order of stay. The anticipatory bail petition came to be rejected on 24.06.2025, on the ground that this Court has stayed all further proceedings of the crime and the said stay is in force and therefore, there is no apprehension of arrest. 8. Writ petition filed by the petitioner came to be disposed of on 08.07.2025, reserving liberty to him to take recourse to such remedy as available in law, including filing of an application for anticipatory bail. Pursuant to the said order, petitioner once again approached the Special Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.5922/2025. The learned Special Judge vide order dated 18.07.2025 rejected the said petition. While, rejecting the petition, learned Special Judge has observed that, as admitted by the petitioner, he appeared before the investigating agency in response to the second notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 dated 09.07.2025 and given his statement. His two mobile phones were seized by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 police under a panchanama. After interrogation, petitioner was sent back and no arrest was made. Thus, there is no apprehension of his arrest. It is further observed that the prosecution has not indicated the necessity of his custodial interrogation and his name also does not find place as accused either in the complaint or in the FIR including the related papers. 9. It is the contention of learned senior counsel that subsequent to rejection of his application seeking bail, petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.2, as per statement of objection filed by the State. He contended that when search was conducted in the house of petitioner, only a sum of Rs.32,000/- in cash and some gold was found which was returned to him and petitioner has responded to the notice issued to him and participated in the enquiry and two mobile phones were seized from him. It is his contention that now on the ground that the said two mobile phones are damaged and alleging that there were conversations between the petitioner and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 accused No.1, Ningappa Savantha, police are trying to arrest him. He contended that accused No.1 is a police constable and even accepting that petitioner had contacted him, it cannot be held that petitioner is involved in any such offence as now alleged against him. He submitted that accused No.1 has filed Crl.P.No.8135/2025 before this Court and the proceedings against him has been stayed. 10. Learned Special Prosecutor has filed statement of objections. He vehemently contended that the complainant received information from several Government officers stating that they have received telephone calls informing them about likelihood of raids or trap conducted against them and in order to avoid the same, they have to give bribe etc. Some of the Government officials have become victims and accused No.1-Ningappa Savantha, who was working as a police constable was frequently visiting the office of the Karnataka Lokayukta and contacting the officials and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 collect information from them about officials of other departments and collect money from them. Based on the information, the Police Inspector-11, City Division, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bengaluru was directed to submit a report and the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bengaluru directed the DYSP to register FIR and investigate the matter. 11. As per prosecution, accused No.1 was in touch with the petitioner and he was visiting him in the office of Lokayukta in relation to the acts narrated in the complaint and the FIR. Hence, a search was conducted in petitioner's house. Pursuant to the notice issued, petitioner was interrogated and two mobile phone handsets were seized. The preliminary examination of mobile phone handsets, as per prosecution, reveal tampering of the same due to extensive damage caused to the mobile sets. The mobile handsets have been sent for FSL examination and the report is awaited. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 12. The learned counsel contended that investigation is under progress and therefore, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and destroying the evidence. He has therefore, sought to dismiss the petition. 13. Learned Special Prosecutor has relied on a decision of the Apex Court in DEVINDER KUMAR BANSAL V/s. STATE OF PUNJAB, reported in (2025) 4 SCC 493, paragraph Nos.20, 21 and 24 of the said judgment which are extracted here. ”20. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused vehemently advanced the argument on the subject of life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by placing strong reliance on the observations made by this Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and submitted that unless the custodial interrogation is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case, declining to grant anticipatory bail amounts to denial of thee rights conferred upon a citizen/person under Article 21 of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 the Constitution. We do not find any merit in this contention of the learned counsel. 21. The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence like corruption are required to be satisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner-accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution. 24. If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the Courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge sheet is filed, the Court may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant accused of indulging in corruption". 14. As already noted, petitioner is not arraigned as an accused in the FIR, whereas, one Ningappa Savantha, has been named as an accused. It is alleged that the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 complainant received information from several Government Officers that they have received telephone calls, informing them that there is likelihood of trap or raid conducted against them and in order to avoid the same, they have to pay bribe amount. Such being the case, FIR was registered against Ningappa Savantha and others and investigation was taken up. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioner, he participated in the enquiry. The learned Special Judge, initially rejected the anticipatory bail application on the ground that in W.P.No.17564/2025, this Court has stayed the further proceedings, as such, there was no apprehension of arrest. After disposal of the writ petition, petitioner once again approached the Special Court seeking anticipatory bail. The said petition has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has appeared before the investigating agency in response to the second notice issued to him and given his statement and two mobile phones have been seized by the police under a - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 panchanama, but he was not arrested and therefore, there is no apprehension of his arrest and further, the prosecution has not indicated the necessity of his custodial interrogation. However, it is pointed out by the learned senior counsel that now in the statement of objections, petitioner has been named as an accused and further, vide requisition dated 24.07.2025, investigating agency has sought permission from the Special Court to arraign him as an accused in this case. Hence, the petitioner has a reasonable apprehension of his arrest. 15. The fact remains that pursuant to the notice issued, petitioner has participated in the enquiry and two mobile phones are recovered from him. At this stage, except the same, there are no materials which would connect him with the crime except the allegation that the accused named in the FIR was visiting the Lokayukta office and contacting the petitioner and there are conversations between them. That by itself cannot be a ground to deny the relief sought in the petition. Petitioner has undertaken - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Apprehension of the prosecution can be safeguarded with necessary conditions. Hence, the following:- ORDER i) Petition is allowed. ii) Petitioner shall be released in the event of his arrest in Crime No.28/2025 of Karnataka Lokayukta Police Station, Bengaluru City, registered for offence punishable under Section 7(A), 7(a) of the P.C. Act, 1988, subject to following conditions:- a) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh only) with a surety for the likesum. b) He shall furnish his residential address/contact number and shall inform the I.O. in case of change in the address/contact number. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34308 CRL.P No. 10806 of 2025 c) He shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. d) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence/witnesses either directly or indirectly. e) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. f) He shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35