- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103796 OF 2024 (438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI KADESH S/O. MALLAPPA JARALI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BENIWAD-591309, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI, NOW AT HEBBAL-416501, TALUK: GADHINGLAJ, DISTRICT: KOLHAPUR, MAHARASTRA STATE. … PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUNANDA P PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, FOR SANKESHWAR POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL PETITION BY ENLARGING THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN SANKESHWAR PS CR.NO.21/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 417, 420 OF IPC 1860 IN SO FOR AS PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JDUGE AND JMFC, SANKESHWAR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.21 14:34:17 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition is filed by accused (petitioner) in Crime no.21/2024 of Sankeshwar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short). 2. Sri Mahantesh S Hiremath, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was agriculturist holding movable and immovable properties at Beniwad village, Hukkeri taluk and permanently residing at Hebbal, Gadhinglaj, Kolhapur. He was residing there with his wife, children and old aged parents and was only bread earner of family. It was submitted, petitioner apprehended arrest in pursuance of false complaint by Basavaraj Ningappa Magadum (complainant) filed on 01.03.2024 with Sankeshwar Police Station based on which Crime no.21/2024 was registered for offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 of IPC against petitioner. It was submitted, even as per complainant incident occurred, on 12.06.2022 wherein it was alleged that petitioner had assured - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 complainant of securing him a job in Forest Department in case he pays Rs.5 lakhs and acting on said promise complainant had paid Rs.1 lakh at 8:00 am on 17.08.2022 in Shivani Hotel near Sankeshwar bus stand, with assurance to pay balance amount later. Complainant kept enquiring about securing job. And after complainant got a job in Railways and began working at Mumbai, he demanded for returning money lent, petitioner kept postponing. Therefore, petitioner had cheated him. 3. It was submitted, complaint was filed 1½ years after incident. It was submitted, petitioner was having agricultural lands, family and old aged parents and was being falsely implicated. It was further submitted, rejection of bail petition by learned District Judge was on ground that FIR showed petitioner had received Rs.5 lakhs which was contrary to complaint. It was submitted, there was no prima facie material to substantiate payment and therefore, petitioner was entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for respondent - State opposes petition. It was submitted, complainant had clearly stated about having paid money to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 petitioner on promise made to secure a job in Forest Department. Same would be prima facie material. It was submitted, FIR stated about complainant having paid Rs.5 lakhs in total. It was further submitted that there was likelihood of petitioner having committed similar offences and as investigation was not yet completed and presence of petitioner for custodial interrogation was required. Hence, instant case was not fit for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record. 6. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail with conditions?” 7. From above, it is seen, petitioner’s apprehension of arrest is founded on registration of complaint / FIR, wherein, he is named as accused. Prima facie perusal of prosecution material would indicate that complaint is filed 1 and ½ years after incident, but with explanation that same was due to assurance by petitioner to refund. It is also seen, as per petitioner, he is holding movable and immovable properties at - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 Beniwad village in Hukkeri taluk, Belagavi district and is a permanent resident of Hebbal village, Gadhinglaj taluk, Kolhapur district. In complaint, complainant has stated to have paid only sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, but while rejecting anticipatory bail, learned District and Sessions Judge has stated about petitioner receiving amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, perhaps by referring to FIR which prima facie appears inconsistent with complaint. 8. Further crime is registered on 01.03.2024 and until now there is no substantial progress or any other incriminating material found against petitioner, except vague allegation of petitioner being involved in similar offences. Therefore, concerns of prosecution could be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions. Under above, circumstances, point for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, this: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused is released on bail in Crime no.21/2024 of Sankeshwar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 of Indian Penal Code, subject to following conditions: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:716 CRL.P No. 103796 of 2024 a) Petitioner/accused shall appear before Investigating Officer within 15 days from date of this order and execute personal bonds for sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for likesum. b) He shall appear before Investigating Officer for purpose of investigation as and when required and co-operate with investigation. c) He shall mark his attendance before Investigating Officer at 11:00 a.m. on every alternative Sunday, until completion of investigation/filing of Charge- Sheet. d) He shall not tamper with or influence prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly and shall not hamper investigation. e) He shall not leave jurisdiction of Kolhapur District of Maharashtra State without prior permission. f) He shall not indulge in any criminal activities. g) He shall forthwith inform any change of residence to Investigating Officer. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE RH/EM CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 20