Karnataka High Court
Bala Subramaniam vs The State Of Madya Pradesh on 20 August, 2025
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
CRL.P No. 11297 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11297 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
BALA SUBRAMANIAM
S/O. MUTTAYA SUBRAMANIAM,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT: NO.14, 7TH CROSS,
KGE LAYOUT, RMV 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 094.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF MADYA PRADESH
Digitally
BY CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION,
signed by INDORE URBAN DISTRICT,
LAKSHMI T
Location: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
High Court
of Karnataka PIN: 452 007.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SANJAY NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE CITY,
REP. BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. NAGESWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
CRL.P No. 11297 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482
BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT TRANSIT ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF ARREST FROM 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE IN FIR
NO.134/2025 BEING REGISTERED AT CRIME BRANCH POLICE
STATION, INDORE URBAN DISTRICT, STATE OF MADHYA
PRADESH FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 316(5), 318(45)
R/W 3(5) OF BNS.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner is seeking transit anticipatory bail for a
limited period in connection with a case registered at
Crime Branch Police Station, Indoor Urban District, State
of Madhya Pradesh in FIR No.134/2025 under Section
316(5), 318(4) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
2. In the mentioned FIR registered against three
accused, petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel that the
petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any
offence as alleged. As per complaint, all the investment
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
HC-KAR
was received from the complainant and others on the
pretext of giving profit, by accused Nos.1 and 2, Directors
of one M/s.Nomex Technologies Pvt. Ltd., whereas the
petitioner is not a Director or the Chief Finance Officer of
the said company. It is submitted that the petitioner is a
resident of Bengaluru, Karnataka State and he may be
granted transit anticipatory bail for a limited period, to
enable him to file an appropriate application before the
jurisdictional Court.
4. Petitioner's counsel submits that in view of
registration of the FIR, petitioner has a reasonable
apprehension of his arrest and in that event, his right to
approach the jurisdictional Court seeking anticipatory bail
will be defeated.
5. It is relevant to refer to a para of the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Priya Indoria v. State of
Karnataka and Ors. reported in (2024) 4 SCC 749
which is extracted hereunder:-
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
HC-KAR
"We say so for the reason that an accused is
presumed to be innocent until proven guilty beyond
reasonable doubt and in accordance with law. In the
circumstances, we hold that the Court of Session or
the High Court, as the case may be, can exercise
jurisdiction and entertain a plea for limited anticipatory
bail even if the FIR has not been filed within its
territorial jurisdiction and depending upon the facts
and circumstances of the case. if the accused
apprehending arrest makes out a case for grant of
anticipatory bail but having regard to the fact that the
FIR has not been registered within the territorial
jurisdiction of the High Court or Court of Session, as
the case may, at the least consider the case of the
accused for grant of transit anticipatory bail which is
an interim protection of limited duration till such
accused approaches the competent Sessions Court or
the High Court, as the case may be, for seeking full-
fledged anticipatory bail.
Since anticipatory bail as well as transit
anticipatory bail are intrinsically linked to personal
liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and
since we have extended the concept of access to
justice to such a situation and bearing in mind Article
14 thereof it would be necessary to give a
constitutional imprimatur to the evolving provision of
transit anticipatory bail. Otherwise, in a deserving
case, there is likelihood of denial of personal liberty as
well as access to justice for, by the time the person
concerned approaches the Court of competent
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
HC-KAR
jurisdiction to seek anticipatory bail. it may well be too
late as he may be arrested. Needless to say, the Court
granting transit anticipatory bail would obviously
examine the degree and seriousness of the
apprehension expressed by the person who seeks
transit anticipatory bail: while the object underlying
exercise of such jurisdiction is to thwart arbitrary
police action and to protect personal liberty besides
providing immediate access to justice though within a
limited conspectus."
6. Petitioner is seeking bail for a limited period so
as to approach the jurisdictional Court. A case is made
out by the petitioner for grant of transit bail. Considering
the facts and circumstances, there is no harm in granting
transit anticipatory bail to the petitioner for a limited
period. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. Petition is allowed.
ii. Petitioner is granted transit anticipatory bail for
a period of 15 days from today to enable him to file
NC: 2025:KHC:32467
HC-KAR
necessary application before the jurisdictional Court
seeking anticipatory bail, subject to following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall be released on executing
a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees one lakh only) in the event of his
arrest in FIR No.134/2025 registered by
Crime Branch Police Station, Indore Urban
District, State of Madhya Pradesh.
2. This order will remain in force for a period
of 15 days from today.
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
TL
