- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 12222 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SRI MANU T J S/O JAYARAMA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NO.35, BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT NEAR POLICE QUARTERS MAGADI MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKERE BENGALURU - 562 130. 2. SRI. JAYARAMA S/O LATE T C KALAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO.35, BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT NEAR POLICE QUARTERS MAGADI MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKERE BENGALURU - 562 130. 3. SMT. SHOBHA D W/O JAYARAMA AGED ANOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NO.35, BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT NEAR POLICE QUARTERS MAGADI MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKERE BENGALURU - 562 130. 4. SRI. SHIVPRASAD T J S/O JAYARAMA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.35, BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT NEAR POLICE QUARTERS Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 MAGADI MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKERE BENGALURU - 562 130. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. THILAKRAJ S.V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PEENYA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEENYA POLICE STATION BENGALURU - 560 058. 3. SRI. RAKESH BALAN S/O BALAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE M/S MERCK LIFE SCIENCE PVT. LTD. R/O AT NO.50, RING ROAD PHASE 3, PEENYA, BENGALURU - 560 058. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. PRAMOD NAIR, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. ANAND MUTTALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT POLICE UNDER SECTION 35(3) OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 DATED 27.10.2025, 28.10.2025, 03.11.2025, 07.11.2025, 07.04.2026, 10.04.2026 IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS HEREIN AS PER ANNEXURE-E TO E5 AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed assailing the impugned Police Notices issued by respondents under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 as per Annexures-E to E.5. 2. The petitioner No.1, who is employed as a Customer Excellence Specialist in M/s. Merck Life Science Private Limited, is presently arrayed as an accused in Crime No.564/2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections pertaining to cheating and criminal breach of trust. It is borne out from the records that the jurisdictional Investigating Officer has already undertaken investigation and has filed what is styled as a preliminary charge sheet, having examined as many as 34 witnesses and having collected voluminous documentary evidence. Notwithstanding the said development, the Investigating - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 Officer has proceeded to invoke the power of further investigation and has issued impugned notices to petitioner Nos.2 to 4, who are none other than the parents and brother of petitioner No.1. 3. The gist of the contention urged by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that once the Investigating Officer has substantially completed the investigation and has laid a preliminary final report before the jurisdictional Court, the issuance of notices under the guise of further investigation, more particularly to the family members who are not arrayed as accused, is nothing but a colourable exercise of power and amounts to sheer abuse of the process of law. It is vehemently contended that petitioner Nos.2 to 4 have no nexus whatsoever with the alleged transaction and their implication is only by way of roping in close relatives, thereby subjecting them to unwarranted harassment. In support of the said submission, reliance is placed on the law laid down by the Hon9ble Apex Court in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 Pramod Kumar and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 156. 4. Per-contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defacto complainant/respondent No.4 would, by placing reliance on the material produced along with a detailed memo, submit that there exists prima facie incriminating material not only against petitioner No.1 but also against petitioner Nos.2 to 4. It is specifically contended that the bank account statements would disclose a money trail, indicating diversion of funds from the account of petitioner No.1 to the accounts maintained by petitioner Nos.2 to 4. It is thus argued that the Investigating Officer is well within his statutory domain to summon the said petitioners for the purpose of further investigation and the impugned notices cannot be termed either arbitrary or illegal. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate, adopting the submissions made by the learned Senior - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 Counsel for respondent No.4, would further contend that the charge sheet filed is only a preliminary charge sheet and the investigation is still in progress. It is submitted that the concept of <further investigation= is statutorily recognized, and in furtherance of the same, the Investigating Officer is empowered to issue notices and summon any person acquainted with the facts of the case. Therefore, it is contended that no interference is warranted at this stage. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners, upon instructions, fairly submits that petitioner Nos.2 to 4, though not arrayed as accused as on date, are willing to co-operate with the Investigating Agency and appear before the Investigating Officer to tender their statements. However, it is earnestly urged that adequate protection be granted, inasmuch as the petitioners apprehend coercive action being taken against them under the guise of interrogation, despite there being no concrete material to implicate them in the alleged offence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 7. This Court, having bestowed its anxious consideration to the rival submissions and having perused the material placed on record, finds that the allegations pertaining to cheating and criminal breach of trust, at this stage, disclose a transaction of considerable magnitude. The material now placed by the learned Senior Counsel for the defacto complainant, particularly the bank account statements, prima facie indicate that amounts allegedly credited to the account of petitioner No.1 have been subsequently transferred to the accounts of petitioner Nos.2 to 4. Whether such transfers constitute culpable diversion of funds or are otherwise explainable transactions is a matter that squarely falls within the domain of investigation. 8. It is trite that the power of further investigation is not eclipsed merely on the filing of a charge sheet and the Investigating Agency retains the authority to unearth the complete truth by collecting additional material. At the same time, this Court cannot be oblivious to the fact that - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are, as on date, not arraigned as accused and are sought to be examined in the course of further investigation. Therefore, a delicate balance is required to be maintained between the right of the Investigating Agency to conduct a fair and comprehensive investigation and the right of the individuals to be protected against unnecessary harassment and coercive action. 9. In the considered opinion of this Court, while no case is made out to interdict the investigation insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned, a limited protection deserves to be extended to petitioner Nos.2 to 4, who have expressed their willingness to co-operate with the investigation, so as to ensure that the process of investigation does not assume the character of oppression. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned stands dismissed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21357 WP No. 12222 of 2026 (ii) The petition insofar as petitioner Nos.2 to 4 is concerned stands allowed in part. (iii) Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the respondent No.3 3 Investigating Officer as and when called upon. (iv) During the course of such appearance and interrogation, the Investigating Officer shall not resort to any coercive steps against petitioner Nos.2 to 4, unless material is gathered warranting such action in accordance with law. (v) Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are directed to appear before the respondent No.3 3 Investigating Officer within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45