Karnataka High Court
Sri. S. Sangamesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 October, 2025
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
CRL.P No. 12320 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12320 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
SRI. S. SANGAMESH,
S/O SHARANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT NO.47, ST.MEERA'S SCHOOL,
DEENABANDUNAGAR, HULSURU,
BENGALURU - 560 008.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M.S.SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MAILARAPPA.D.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
HALASURU GATE POLICE,
Digitally BENGALURU.
signed by REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP,
KAVYA R HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Location: BANGALORE - 560 001.
High Court ...RESPONDENT
of Karnataka (BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS)
PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ARREST IN
CRL.MISC.NO.6751/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.88/2025
REGISTERED BY HALASURGATE P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES
P/U/S 318(4),336(2),336(3),340(2) OF BNS ACT, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF 48th ACJM, AT BENGALURU.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
CRL.P No. 12320 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
Accused No.2 in Crime No.88/2025 registered by
Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2)
of BNS, 2023 is before this Court in this successive bail
petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking
anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.88/2025 was registered by
Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the
aforesaid offences against Sangamesh Infrastructure India
Pvt. ltd., and the petitioner herein who is proprietor of
accused No.1, based on the first information dated
05.04.2025 received by Pradeep Devanur - Executive
Engineer, Public Works Department, Bengaluru.
Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioner had filed
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
Crl.Misc.No.3075/2025 before the Jurisdictional Sessions
Court which was rejected and therefore he had
approached this Court in Crl.P.No.6824/2025 which was
rejected on 05.06.2025. It is under this circumstance, he
is before this Court in this successive petition.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner having
reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that
after dismissal of Crl.P.No.6824/2025, petitioner has
voluntarily appeared before the Investigation Officer in the
present case multiple times and has fully cooperated with
the Investigation Officer for investigation. He was not
arrested by the police and on the other hand after
interrogation, the police had sent him back. For
extraneous reasons, police have now threatened to arrest
the petitioner and it is under these circumstances
petitioner apprehends arrest. He submits that petitioner
has no criminal antecedent and the maximum punishment
for the alleged offences is imprisonment for a period of 7
years. In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance on
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
SIDDARTH V/S STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH reported in
(2022) 1 SCC 676. Accordingly, he prays to allow this
petition.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP, who has opposed the
prayer made in the petition, however, does not dispute
that petitioner has appeared before the Investigation
Officer multiple times and has cooperated with the
Investigation Officer for the purpose of investigation. He
however submits that no change in circumstance is made
out to entertain a successive bail petition seeking
anticipatory bail. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this
petition.
6. In the first information, it is mentioned that
petitioner had participated in the tender called for by the
Public Works Department and along with the tender
documents, petitioner had produced certain fixed deposit
receipts which was one of the requirements, as per the
terms and conditions of the tender document, for the
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
purpose of participating in the tender. It appears that the
work under the tender notification was allotted to the
petitioner and subsequently, it was found that the fixed
deposit receipts which were produced by the petitioner
along with this tender application were forged documents
and it is under these circumstances, the first informant
had approached the police and based on his first
information, FIR was registered against the company of
the petitioner and the petitioner.
7. Considering the nature of allegations found in the
first information and also since it was necessary to find out
the source of the alleged forged fixed deposit receipts, this
Court having arrived at a conclusion that custodial
interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary in the
case, his prayer for anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.6824/2025
was rejected.
8. It is now brought to the notice of this Court that
petitioner has thereafter appeared before the Investigation
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
Officer on multiple occasions and has fully cooperated with
the Investigation Officer for the purpose of investigation in
the present case. The said submission is not seriously
disputed by the learned HCGP.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETRE V. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS. - AIR 2011 SCC 694 has observed
that if the material on record reveals that the accused has
cooperated with the Police for the purpose of investigation
in normal circumstances his prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail needs to be entertained. Undisputedly the
petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. The alleged
offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and
maximum punishment for said offences is imprisonment
for a period of seven years. Petitioner has undertaken
before the Court that he is ready and willing to appear
before the Investigation Officer in the event his presence
is necessary for the purpose of further interrogation. It is
the specific case of the petitioner that for extraneous
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
reasons there is a threat of arrest and it is under these
circumstances, he is before this Court. Considering the
aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that
petitioner's prayer for grant of anticipatory bail needs to
be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
The Criminal Petition is allowed.
The respondent - Police or any other police in the
State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioner in
the event of his arrest registered in Crime No.88/2025
registered by Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City,
for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2),
336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The Petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer within 15 days from the
date of receipt of the copy of this order and
shall execute a personal bond for a sum of
NC: 2025:KHC:43772
HC-KAR
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with
two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction
of the investigating officer.
2. Petitioner shall regularly appear
before the Trial Court without fail unless
exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.
3. Petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution witness and he shall co-operate
with the police for investigation and appear
before them whenever called upon.
4. The petitioner shall not involve in
similar offences in future;
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
KVR
