- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7558 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PHIJA S/O. SRI FAYAZ PASHA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT NO.54, HESARAGHATTA MAIN ROAD, MEDI AGRAHARA BENGALURU - 560 097. 2. SMT. TASLEEM TAJ D/O. SHAIK ILYAS PASHA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS NO.348, ADITHYA NAGAR M. S. PALYA CIRCLE VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU - 560 097. 3. KUM. SOUNDARYA C. D/O. CHIKKANNA M. AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/AT NO.128, LAKSHMIPURA, BENGALURU NORTH VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU - 560 097. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI BALARAJ V.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY S.H.O. OF YALAHANKA NEW TOWN POLICE STATION BENGALURU. Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI RANGASWAMY R., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THEM BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION DIRECTING THE LEARNED 7TH ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.167/2025 OF YALAHANKA NEW TOWN POLICE STATION UNDER SECTIONS 34, 406 AND 420 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 3. It is the case of prosecution that one Sri Srinivas S. lodged a complaint on 14.04.2025 alleging that accused No.1- Javid called the complainant and explained the packages offered by Fala Tours and Travels. It is further alleged that the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 complainant was informed that he had won a “lucky dip”, pursuant to which, on 11.09.2022, the complainant along with his wife visited the office of the accused, discussed the package and after being satisfied with the same, paid an amount of ₹1,35,000/- through Indusland Bank Credit Card. 3.1 The petitioners along with accused No.1-Javid failed to fulfill the trip package and did not return the amount. On the contrary, the accused are alleged to have threatened the complainant with dire consequences. In view of the same, the complaint came to be lodged by the complainant against the petitioners and accused No.1-Javid before the respondent- Police, who registered a case in crime in No.167/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 34, 406 and 420 of IPC. 3.2 The petitioners herein, apprehending their arrest in view of the registration of the complaint, approached the District and Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.3978/2025, which came to be rejected. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest for the aforesaid offences in the said crime. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 4 and were working as per instructions. When the complainant visited the office, a package deal was agreed upon. Being satisfied with the same, the complainant paid the amount through his debit card. It is further contended by the learned counsel that the complainant independently availed certain services under the package and thereafter, the petitioners repaid some amount to the complainant, but a false complaint has been lodged to implicate the petitioners herein. It is submitted that the transaction between the complainant and petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 took place in the month of September 2022 and there have been no monetary transactions between them thereafter. It is also contended by the learned counsel that there is a delay in lodging the complaint. 4.1 It is further contended by the learned counsel that the complainant had credited an amount of ₹1,35,000/-. However, he was not satisfied with the packages offered by the accused-Company and therefore, the petitioners had agreed to refund the said amount after completion of the necessary - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 formalities. Before such refund could be processed, the complaint came to be registered against the petitioners herein along with accused No.1-Javid. It is further contended that the petitioners had, in fact, expressed their willingness to refund the amount to the complainant in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. On these grounds, learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners be released on bail, as the offences alleged against them are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. In view of the fact that the petitioners have expressed their willingness to repay the amount, they are entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail. 4.2 During the course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioners handed over a cheque for a sum of ₹1,35,000/- dated 18.05.2026, contending that the petitioners intends to repay the amount. It is also submitted that the entire amount would be paid before the said date and upon such payment, the complainant shall return the cheque, failing which, on the said date, the cheque may be presented for encashment. The complainant-Sri Srinivas S., is present before the Court and identified by the learned High Court Government Pleader. He - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 has no objection to receiving the said cheque, subject to the condition that if the amount is paid prior to the date mentioned in the cheque, he shall return the cheque to the petitioners- accused Nos.2 to 4. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State contends that a prima facie case of cheating is made out against the petitioners. It is further contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioners are habitual offenders and that as many as ten cases have been registered against them. According to the prosecution, they have been cheating the public under the guise of offering package holiday tours and thereafter, failing to comply with the terms and conditions of such packages. Therefore, the offences alleged are made out and the petitioners do not deserve grant of anticipatory bail. 5.1 It is also submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader that he identifies the complainant - Sri Srinivas S., who is present before the Court. Upon verification, it is submitted that the complainant has received a - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 sum of ₹1,35,000/- from the petitioners by way of cheque, towards the transaction in dispute referred to above. 6. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 7. Apparently, it is seen that the complainant had availed a certain tour and travel package for which he had paid a sum of ₹1,35,000/-. Whether he was satisfied with the package or whether he did not avail the same are matters of fact into which this Court cannot delve at this stage. It remains undisputed that the said amount of ₹1,35,000/-, having been paid earlier, has now been refunded by way of cheque, which has been acknowledged by the complainant, who is physically present before the Court. The offences alleged are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. 8. Under the circumstance, this petition deserves to be allowed by imposing certain stringent conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. This petition is allowed; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23644 CRL.P No. 7558 of 2025 ii. The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 shall be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.167/2025 registered before Yelahanka New Town Police Station, subject to following conditions: a) The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/SHO; b) The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 shall not hamper and tamper with the prosecution witness and they shall co-operate with the investigation; c) The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the State without prior permission of the Court; d) The petitioners-accused Nos.2 to 4 shall not involve themselves in any similar offences during the period of bail; Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0