- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3847 OF 2026 (438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS) BETWEEN: MR MUKESHKUMAR JAIN S/O KISHAN LAL AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.305, 3RD FLOOR ‘H’ BLOCK, MADHUBAN COMPLEX J.C NAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 020. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. MONISHA N.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DILIPKUMARGOWDA.R., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SOUTH EAST CEN POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY PROSEUCTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL.SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER FORTHWITH ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO.250/2025 REGISTERED BY SOUTH EAST CEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 318(4) AND 319(2) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA AND SECTIONS 66(C) AND 66(D) OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Crime No.250/2025 registered by SouthEast CEN Crime Police Station, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4) of BNS 2023, is before this Court in the present petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional State Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent- State. 3. FIR in Crime No.250/2025 was registered by SouthEast CEN Crime Police Station for the aforesaid offences against unknown persons based on the first information dated 09.07.2025 received from Manish Kumar, who is the elder brother of the Rajath A. Jain, alleged victim in the present case. During the course of investigation of the said case, a requisition - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 was filed before the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate to permit the Investigating Officer to conduct a raid to the house of the petitioner herein. Therefore, petitioner apprehended arrest in the present case and he had approached Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.8317/2025, which was rejected on 28.10.2025. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and is ready and willing to co-operate with the Police for the purpose of investigation. On the day, investigating officer had conducted raid to the house of the petitioner, he was very much present in the house. No incriminating material has been collected from his house. Petitioner has co-operated with the Police for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, she prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned Additional SPP, who has opposed the petition, submits that during the course of the raid, a sum of Rs.1,11,42,000/- in cash was seized from the house of the petitioner in addition to 400 gms gold and 3 kg of silver articles. Investigation of the case is still under progress. On - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 instructions, she submits that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer has already recorded the statement of the petitioner. 6. The FIR in the present case is registered against unknown persons. During the course of the investigation, since the Police suspected the hand of the petitioner herein in the alleged crime, an application was filed before the Jurisdictional Court of Magistrate to issue a search warrant for the purpose of conducting raid in the petitioner’s house. In the raid conducted thereafter, an amount of Rs.1,11,42,000/- in cash has been seized in addition to gold and silver jewellery as aforesaid. However, the fact remains that the petitioner’s statement was recorded by the Police in the present case and he has co- operated for the purpose of investigation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors – (2011) 1 SCC 694, in paragraph Nos.89 and 90 has observed as follows: “89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. In cases - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 where the court is of the considered view that the accused has joined investigation and he is fully cooperating with the investigating agency and is not likely to abscond, in that event, custodial interrogation should be avoided. 90. A great ignominy, humiliation and disgrace is attached to the arrest. Arrest leads to many serious consequences not only for the accused but for the entire family and at times for the entire community. Most people do not make any distinction between arrest at a pre-conviction stage or post-conviction stage. Whether the powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. are subject to limitation of section 437 Cr.P.C.?” 7. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its subsequent judgments in the case of Bijender vs. State of Haryana - SLP (Crl.)No.1079/2024 and Vinay Kumar Gupra vs. State of Madhya Pradesh - SLP(Crl) No.20215/2025 - 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 180. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. The alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and the maximum punishment for the said offences is imprisonment for a period of seven years. The petitioner has undertaken to co-operate with the Police for the purpose of investigation. Under the circumstances, I am of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 opinion that his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail needs to be answered affirmatively, subject to appropriate conditions. Accordingly, the following:- 7. The petition is allowed. The respondent - Police or any other police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.250/2025 registered by SouthEast CEN Crime Police Station, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4) of BNS 2023, subject to the following conditions: i) The Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer. ii) Petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27367 CRL.P No. 3847 of 2026 iii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he shall co-operate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon. iv) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE MDS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37