- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17710 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MADHUKAR @ MADHU S/O RAJAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, CHALAKURU POST, BELUR TALUK – 573 115 HASSAN DISTRICT 2. ARUNKUMAR @ ARUN S/O ERAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS KORATIKERE VILLAGE, BELUR TALUK – 573 115 HASSAN DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA. G. H., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 AND: STATE BY CEN DAVANGERE POLICE …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. B.PUSHPALATHA., ADDL. SSP) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO DIRECT THE CEN POLICE DAVANAGERE LODGED COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.40/2025 ACCUSED NO.1 TO 6 UNDER SECTION 66(c) AND 66(D) OF IT ACT AS WELL 308(2), 318(2), 319(2) OF BNS ACT 2023 AND IN CRIMINAL MISC. NO.1108/20525 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT DAVANAGERE, WHICH IS REGECTED, HENCE, ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS NO.3 AND 4 ON REGULAR BAIL AND ALLOW THIS APPLICATION AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 4 are before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.40/2025 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 308(2), 318(2) and 319(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, accused Nos.1, 2, 5, 6 are the residents of Malapuram District, Kerala. Accused No.3 was working in the bakery of accused No.1. Accused No. 4 is the friend of accused No.3. The accused Nos.1 to 6 in furtherance of common intention to deceive the public stated that they have digitally arrested the public. It is further alleged that from 05.02.2025 till 17.02.2025, the accused contacted the complainant through WhatsApp stating that complainant had received a parcel from blue dot courier from Mumbai and informed the complainant that the said parcel - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 contained drugs sent by Mr. Naresh Goyal, who is the accused in the prime case. Further, they threatened the complainant and made him to deposit Rs.26,49,000/- to their bank account. Accused Nos.3 and 4 misused the bank accounts of CWs.9 to 17 withdrawn cash from the bank. The complainant after coming to know that he had been cheated, a case came to be registered against the unknown persons. The respondent-police after registering the case, conducted investigation against all the accused. 3. Heard Sri.Manjunath G.H., learned counsel for petitioner No.1, Sri.K.N.Prakash, learned counsel for petitioner No.2 and Smt.B.Pushpalatha, learned Additional SPP respondent-State. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that they have arraigned as accused Nos.3 and 4. The allegations are leveled against them are that they had introduced CWs.9 to 17 and withdrawn the amount from the accounts of CWs.9 to 17. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 5. It is further alleged that the petitioners had assisted the other accused in depositing the amount to the various accounts and thereafter, collected the amount and handed over the same to the accused Nos.1 and 2. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences and they were not aware about the transaction and other information. They are the permanent resident of Hassan District. They will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of their release on bail. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, the learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for respondent-State vehemently submitted that the manner in which the accused have committed the offences against innocent persons is not only a financial threat to the particular individual, but also, threat to the nation at large. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 8. It is further submitted that all the accused in furtherance of common intention to deceive the complainant played a game of digital arrest in order to gain unlawfully. The manner in which they threatened the innocent retired employee certainly would cause endanger to the public at large. Therefore, at this stage, if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there may be chances of committing not only similar offences and also there are chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant them bail. Making such submissions, she prays to reject the petition. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the charge sheet. No doubt, the digital arrest is a threat to the nation and society at large. If such offences are not regulated properly, many public would be affected. We have been come across many instances where innocent people are being victimized at the hands of fraudsters. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 10. The Government has taken initiative to announce/publish in the form of advertisement in the radio that people should beware of the digital arrest, which is not at all in existence. In spite of such warning and also instructions given by the Government, public are being victimized and many people have lost their lives. 11. In the present case, a retired employee had deposited Rs.22,40,000/- to the petitioners and others in the name of digital arrest stated by the accused. After coming to know that he has been deceived, then he has chosen to lodge a complaint. The manner in which the petitioners have assisted the other accused in getting the money would indicate its severity and gravity thereof. Hence, it is appropriate to reject the bail petition in order to give strong message to the society at large. It is needless to be state that sometime the courts are required to be more vigilant to regulate such offences by way of giving strong support to the public at large. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14191 CRL.P No. 17710 of 2025 12. In the present case, there are several documents secured by the Investigating Officer to demonstrate that the present petitioners were involved in assisting the accused Nos.1 and 2 in transferring the amount received from the complainant. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant any relief as prayed for. 13. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is rejected. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30