Karnataka High Court
Rajesh Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 19 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
CRL.A No. 2278 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2278 OF 2025 (KPIDFE)
BETWEEN:
RAJESH KUMAR
S/O. MADANLAL
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1817/A,
SUBHASHNAGAR, 7TH CROSS,
MANDYA - 571 401
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H. V. PRAVEEN GOWDA, ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MANDYA EAST P.S.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560 001
...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed by (BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP)
LAKSHMINARAYAN
N
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 16 OF KPIDEF ACT 2004
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2025
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE I ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT MANDYA FURTHER TO GRANT BAIL BY DIRECTING
THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE THEM ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN C.C.NO.3971/2022 (ARISING OUT
OF CR.NO.157/2014 ORIGINAL C.C.NO.1959/2017) OF
MANDYA EAST P.S. FOR AN ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S
406,408,420,120B R/W 149 OF IPC AND SEC.9 OF KARNATAKA
PROTECTION OF INTEREST DEPOSITORS EXORBITANT ACT
PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C AT MANDYA.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
CRL.A No. 2278 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellant who is accused No.5, has preferred this
appeal against the order dated 15.10.2025 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.756/2025 by the I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Mandya.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are
referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.
3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that, on the
basis of complaint filed by Manukumar B.M., Mandya East
Police Station registered the case in Crime No.157/2014
against the accused 1 to 15 for the offence under sections
406, 408, 409, 420 read with 149 of IPC.
4. After investigation, Investigating Officer has
submitted the charge sheet against the accused 1 to 15
for the offence under sections 120B, 149, 406, 408, 420,
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
HC-KAR
468 of IPC and Section 9 of Karnataka Protection of
Interest of Depositors Act, 1997. After filing the charge
sheet, case was registered in CC.No.1959/2017. Summons
was not issued to the present appellant and case was split-
up against this accused and a separate case was
registered in CC.No.3971/2022 and the trial Court issued
NBW to the present appellant. All other accused are on
bail. Since summons was not served to the present
appellant, he had not appeared before the trial Court.
Same is bonafide and not an intentional one. However, the
appellant had filed application under Section 482 of BNSS,
2023, same came to be rejected by the trial Court. Being
aggrieved by this order of rejection, the appellant has
preferred this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that
in Para No.11 of the impugned order, the trial Court has
observed that the petitioner had retired from the
partnership firm with effect from 02.07.2010. In the
charge sheet it is alleged that from 31.08.2010 to
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
HC-KAR
08.12.2012, there is misappropriation of amount. The
present appellant is no way concerned to the commission
of alleged offence. On all these grounds, it is sought for
allowing this appeal.
6. Learned HCGP Sri B.Lakshman submits that even
after service of summons, the appellant did not appear
before the trial Court. Hence he is not entitled for any
relief from this Court.
7. I have examined the materials placed before this
court. On the basis of complaint filed by Manukumar B.M.,
Mandya East Police have registered the case in Crime
No.157/2014 against accused 1 to 15 for the commission
of offence under sections 406, 408, 409, 420 read with
149 of IPC. After investigation, IO has submitted charge
sheet against the same accused for the offence under
sections 120B, 149, 406, 408, 420, 468 of IPC and Section
9 of Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors Act,
1997. The observation made by the trial Court at para
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
HC-KAR
No.11 of the judgment, would indicate that petitioner
retired from the said partnership firm with effect from
02.07.2010. The charge sheet averments prima facie
reveals that there is misappropriation from the date
31.08.2010 to 08.12.2012. The accused was not the
partner of the firm from 31.08.2010 to 08.12.2012.
However at this stage, it is not just and proper to express
any opinion on the merits of the case.
8. It is submitted by the appellant counsel that
summons was not duly served to the appellant. Therefore,
he could not appear before the court. And all other
accused are on bail. It is submitted that in
CC.No.1959/2017, the trial is not yet commenced.
Considering the nature and gravity of offence and previous
antecedents of the petitioner, it is just and proper to allow
this appeal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed.
NC: 2025:KHC:47747
HC-KAR
(ii) The order dated 15.10.2025 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.756/2025 by the I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Mandya is set
aside. Consequently, application filed under
Section 482 of BNSS 2023 is allowed.
(iii) Appellant/accused No.5 shall be released
on bail on executing self-bond of
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for likesum
to the satisfaction of the trial Court in
CC.No.3971/2022.
(iv) Appellant/accused No.5 shall not tamper or
threaten the prosecution witnesses in any
manner.
(v) Appellant/accused No.5 shall appear before
the trial Court on all the dates of hearing
without fail.
(vi) Registry is directed to send copy of this
order to the trial Court for taking necessary
action.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
DHA
