AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.30/2026 registered by the CCB Bengaluru City Police for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS, 2023') and Sections 66, 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is before this Court in this criminal petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) seeking anticipatory bail.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
FIR in Crime No.30/2026 was registered by the CCB Bengaluru City Police against one Vishal Patil and others for the aforesaid offences based on the first information dated 21.03.2026 received from respondent No.2 herein, who is the defacto complainant. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioners had filed Crl.Misc.No.5235/2026 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 12.06.2026. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had used the platform of complainant’s company as per the representation of accused No.1, who is acquainted to them. He submits that the entire allegation in the first information is as against accused No.1, who had allegedly induced one of the employees of the company to create a manual mode for the purpose of using the platform and making payments to the account of the company. Petitioners do not have criminal antecedents and they are ready and willing to cooperate for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
Per contra, learned HCGP, who has opposed the petition, submits that the petitioners are from the states of Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra. Considering the nature of the allegation, their custodial interrogation is necessary. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, having adopted the arguments addressed by learned HCGP, submits that the petitioners had conspired with accused No.1 to commit the alleged offences and they have used the platform of the company without making payments. The accused persons are liable to pay huge money to the company. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
A reading of the first information dated 05.11.2025 would go to show that the first informant is the Director & Co-Founder of the company known as Zocket Technologies Private Limited, which was operating a prepaid platform for the purpose of advertisements, for persons who are looking for posting their products for advertisement. Accused No.1 had approached the company in the month of April 2024 and was using the platform of the company ever since then and the payment for his usage was being made automatically to the Company's Master Wallet.
In the first information, it is alleged that, on 23.06.2025, accused No.1 had made a request to the company for creating a manual mode to operate the platform and account of the company, instead of the automatic mode. Since accused No.1 was an old customer, the company had considered his request and a manual mode of operation was created for his purpose. The other accused persons started using the platform of the company, after they were introduced by accused No.1 to the said platform. It is not the case of the first informant that even prior to the change of operation of the platform from automatic mode to manual mode, the other accused persons except accused No.1 had approached the company.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, payment was being made by them as per the instructions of accused No.1, who had introduced them to the platform and they were not at all aware of the alleged fraud committed by accused No.1. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have no other criminal antecedents. They have undertaken to co-operate with the Police for the purpose of investigation and also to abide by the conditions imposed on them.
Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners for anticipatory bail needs to be answered affirmatively subject to imposing appropriate conditions. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
The criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The respondent No.1- Police or any other police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioners in the event of their arrest in Crime No.30/2026 registered by the CCB Bengaluru City Police for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 66, 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, subject to the following conditions:
The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and each petitioner shall execute a Personal Bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, of which one shall be a local surety, for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
The petitioners shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.
The Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witness and they shall co-operate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon.
The petitioners shall not involve in similar offences in future.