Karnataka High Court
Sri Shankara vs State By on 15 October, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
CRL.P No. 11801 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11801 OF 2025
[438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)]
BETWEEN:
SRI SHANKARA
S/O LATE. SUBRAMANI,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF NO.115/116,
5TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS,
ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE,
SRIGANDADHA KAVAL,
BENGALULRU - 560 058.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ABHISHEK H.V., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ATHREYA C SHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI STATE BY
Location: HIGH RAJAGOPALANAGARA P.S
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BENGALURU CITY,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (FILED UNDER SECTION
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
CRL.P No. 11801 of 2025
HC-KAR
482 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE
PETITIONER IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY
RAJAGOPALANAGARA POLICE STATION RELATED TO CRIME
NO.937/2016 REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 399 AND 402 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section
482 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying
to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.937/2016 of
Rajagopal Nagar Police Station registered for offences
punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of Indian Penal
Code.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -
State.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend
that, the petitioner who has been granted bail by this
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
HC-KAR
Court, in the said crime did not receive any summons or
notice. The case against the petitioner has been split up
and now NBW has been issued against him and he is
apprehending his arrest. The petitioner is having wife and
two children who are dependant on him. With these, he
prayed to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader would contend that, even though the petitioner
was granted bail, he did not appear in the criminal case
and therefore, the case against him has been split up. The
Court has issued proclamation and it has been duly
published. The petitioner is a rowdy sheeter and he is
involved in eight criminal cases for offences under Section
380 of Indian Penal Code and other offences. The
petitioner is a habitual offender and if the petitioner is
granted anticipatory bail, he will abscond and threaten the
prosecution witnesses and commit similar offences. As the
petitioner is declared as a proclaimed offender, he is not
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
HC-KAR
entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. With these, he
prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for
the parties, this Court has perused the FIR, complaint and
other materials placed on record.
6. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in
Crime No.937/2016 of Rajagopalanagara Police Station
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399
and 402 of Indian Penal Code. Charge sheet has been
filed against the petitioner for the said offences. The
petitioner has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal
Petition No.9676/2016 vide order dated 12.01.2017. The
petitioner thereafter did not appear in criminal case
registered against him. The learned Sessions Judge while
passing the order in anticipatory bail petition at paragraph
11 has observed that, the petitioner has failed to appear
and has issued proclamation under Section 83 of Code of
Criminal Procedure and the said proclamation has been
duly published on 14.09.2023. At paragraph 12, the
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
HC-KAR
learned Sessions Judge placing reliance on the judgment
of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of STATE OF MADHYA
PRADESH VS. PRADEEP SHARMA reported in (2014) 2
SCC 171 has held that as the petitioner is a proclaimed
offender in terms of Section 82 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
On the same point, the learned Sessions Judge has placed
reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of STATE OF HARYANA VS. DHARMRAJ reported in
(2023)17 SCC 510 and has held that, as the petitioner
is a proclaimed offender, he is not entitled for grant of
anticipatory bail. Moresoever, the petitioner is stated to be
rowdy sheeter involved in eight criminal cases for offence
under Section 380 of Indian Penal Code and other
offences. Considering the said facts, it is clear that, the
petitioner is a habitual offender.
7. Considering all the above said aspects, the
petitioner has not made out a case for grant of
NC: 2025:KHC:40858
HC-KAR
anticipatory bail. In the result, this Criminal Petition is
dismissed.
8. The petitioner is directed to surrender before
the Jurisdictional Court.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
KLV
