Sri N R Prasad v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:22601( CRL.P(No.(17632(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(24 (DAY(OF(APRIL,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(ANANT(RAMANATH(HEGDE( CRIMINAL(PETITION(NO.(17632(OF(2025( BETWEEN:(( (

SRI.,N.,R.,PRASAD,, S/O,NATRAJ,B,,, AGED,ABOUT,55,YEARS,,,

THNO.86/18,,7 ,A,CROSS,,ITTUMADU,,, BANGALORE,-,85., (WRONGLY,TYPED,AS,K.R.PRASAD,IN,CRL., MISC.NO.11375/2025, …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,GURURAJ,K.,,ADVOCATE,FOR, ,,,,,,SRI.,RANGANATH,R.,,ADVOCATE), , AND:( (

THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,, BY,ANNAPOORNESWARI,NAGARA,, Digitallytisigned by0BELUR POLICE,STATION,,, RANGADHAMA BENGALURU,-,560,091., NANDINI REPRESENTED,BY,THE,, Location:0HIGH STATE,PUBLIC,PROSECUTOR,,,COURT0OF KARNATAKA HIGH,COURT,BUILDING,,, BENGALURU,-,560,001., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.R.RANGASWAMY,,HCGP), , THIS,CRL.P.,IS,FILED,U/S,438,OF,CR.PC,(FILED,U/S,482, BNSS),PRAYING,TO,GRANT,THE,PETITIONERS,ANTICIPATORY, BAIL, AND, DIRECT, THE, RESPONDENT, POLICE, STATION, TO, RELEASE,THE,PETITIONERS,,IN,THE,EVENT,OF,HIS,ARREST,IN,

CR.NO.436/2025 OF ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGARA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE O/P/U/S 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2), R/W 3(5) OF BNSS, 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IV ACJM, BENGALURU CITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

This criminal petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail invoking Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (BNSS).

¶2The complaint is filed against the petitioner under Section 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2) r/w Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (BNS) in the Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru.

¶3The complainant alleged that the petitioner persuaded the complainant to purchase a site worth Rs.3 Crore 50 Lakh from the petitioner. The complainant also states that he has transferred an amount of Rs.40 lakh to the account of the petitioner and remaining amount is

transferred to various other persons named by the petitioner as reflected in the complaint. It is also stated that the complainant has also paid certain amount of cash to the petitioner.

¶4The further allegation is that the petitioner has also obtained blank cheques, demand promissory note, e-stamp papers from the complainant and the mother of the complainant.

¶5It is alleged that petitioner has not sold the property as assured and has also not repaid the amount. It is further stated that when the complainant insisted for registration of the site property or to return the documents and the amount which the petitioner has retained, the petitioner has given life threat to the complainant.

¶6The application filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court is rejected vide order dated 23.12.2025. Hence, petitioner is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in this criminal petition.

¶7Learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the transaction between the complainant and the petitioner as alleged, if any, is a civil dispute/transaction and it is given a colour of criminal case and part of the alleged transaction reflected in the bank statements, as such, there is no need for custodial interrogation of the petitioner.

¶8It is further submitted that this Court vide order dated 30.12.2025 has granted interim bail on certain conditions and the petitioner is ready to abide by any of the conditions which this Court will impose and he has not violated any of the terms and conditions of the interim bail.

¶9Learned HCGP would oppose the grant of anticipatory bail stating that the amount involved in the transaction is to the tune of Rs.3 Crore and 50 lakh. The petitioner has cheated the complainant as well as his

family members by retaining the money and some of the documents belonging to complainant and his mother and the petitioner is blackmailing the complainant and his family members and has refused to execute the sale deed which he had promised and has also refused to repay the amount.

¶10Learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that, there is a life threat to the complainant and the petitioner has not complied with the requirement of terms and conditions imposed in the interim order dated

30.12.2025, thus, would urge that the bail application be dismissed.

¶11The Court has considered the contentions raised in the Bar and perused the records.

¶12The tenor of the complaint would indicate that according to the complainant there was some transactions relating to the sale of the site property. The complainant claims to have paid the said amount. However,

complainant alleges that the accused has not acted as per his assurance.

¶13The nature of the complaint would prima-facie indicate that the dispute appears to be a civil dispute between the parties.

¶14It is further stated that certain amount of cash is paid to the petitioner and the petitioner has disputed the said statement. The petitioner is admitting the fact that certain amount is credited to his account by the complainant.

¶15Apart from that, on 30.12.2025 the Court has granted interim bail and no material is placed to show that the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail.

¶16Under the circumstances, the Court is of the view that the petition is to be allowed and the anticipatory bail has to be granted to the petitioner. Hence the following:-

ORDER

i) The petition is allowed.

ii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police on 28.04.2026 at 10.30 a.m.

iii) The petitioner in Crime No.436/2025 of Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, shall furnish a bail bond for Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh) only along with two sureties for the likesum.

iv) The petitioner shall cooperate for investigation and shall attend the Police station as and when called for.

v) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

vi) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Courts.

Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

BSV List No.: 5 Sl No.: 3