- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12725 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC)/ 482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI. RAKSHAGAN BALAJI @ SRIRATCHAGAN BALAJI S/O. BALAJI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, FLAT NO.M-408, VGN STAFFORD SUDHARASNAM STREET, 4TH FLOOR, THIRUMALAIVASAN NAGAR, THIRUMULLAIVOYAL, THIRUVALLUR TAMILNADU-600062 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KARTHIK N., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WEST CEN CRIME POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJATH SUBRAMANYAM, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023, (438 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.286/2025 DATED 30.07.2025 OF WEST CEN CRIME POLICE Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 66 AND 66(C) OF THE I.T ACT 2000 AND SEC.318(4) OF THE BNS 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 47TH ADDL.C.M.M COURT NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGLAURU CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth referred to as 'BNSS' for short) seeking anticipatory bail in Cr.No.286/2025 registered by West CEN police for the offences punishable under Sections 66 and 66(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that the complainant is the owner of Reverse Osmosis Store, Bengaluru which is a wholesale and retail supplier of water and waste water treatment equipments. The complainant was using Vyapar billing software for billing, sales, purchase, stocking, estimates and inventory etc., The complainant claimed that his cousin met him on 28.07.2025 and told him that Vyapar Billing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 Software data can be accessed by accused No.1, an employee of Vyapar. The complainant alleged that accused No.2 who is the director of Water DNA Private Limited was accessing the RO store, Chennai data through accused No.1. This information was purportedly received from an ex-employee of Water DNA Private Limited. Based on the said information, respondent No.1 registered Crime No.286/2025 for the aforesaid offences and commenced investigation. 3. The petitioner filed a petition in Crl.Misc.No.7019/2025 under Section 482 BNSS, before the District Court, which was rejected in terms of an order dated 22.08.2025. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of the information furnished by the complainant before respondent No.1 would show that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 merely on suspicion. It is alleged that the petitioner being the Director of Water DNA Private Limited, was accessing the Vyapar billing software data of RO Store, Chennai for about one-and-a-half years prior to the date of the crime and that he had purchased the same from accused - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 No.1 in exchange for licences/money. This purportedly was the information received from an ex-employee of Water DNA Private Limited. He therefore contends that there is no material to implicate the petitioner except the self-serving statement of the complainant. He further contends that the offences alleged against the petitioner are neither punishable with death nor imprisonment for life and that there is no likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence or interfering with the course of investigation, as everything can be gathered from the data of the complainant. Thus, he contends that the petitioner is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.286/2025. 5. The learned High Court Government Pleader however opposed the petition and contended that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to find out whether the petitioner had access to the data of the complainant's company and whether accused No.1 had shared or sought help of accused No.1 to access the said data and part it for consideration. He thus contends that the petitioner is needed for custodial interrogation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 6. I have considered submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. 7. A perusal of the information furnished by the complainant to respondent shows that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 on mere suspicion that he being a director of a company, had brokered with the accused No.1 for securing confidential details of the complainant's company. If such access or sharing had occurred, the same could be identified through digital foot printer using internet tools and therefore, there is no necessity to subject the petitioner to custodial interrogation. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is unlikely that the petitioner would tamper with the evidence, as it is already available. The offence alleged is not punishable with death or life imprisonment. 8. In that view of the matter, this petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail and the respondent is directed to enlarge him on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.286/2025, subject to the following conditions: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19761 CRL.P No. 12725 of 2025 (i) The Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer. (ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witness and he shall co-operate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon. (iv) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court, without prior permission; (v) Petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2