AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.135/2026 registered by Adugodi Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 74, 318(4), 351(2), 338, 352, read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS, 2023') for short) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, are 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 petitioners, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
FIR in Crime No.135/2026 was registered by Adugodi Police Station, Bengaluru, for the aforesaid offences against the petitioners herein based on the first information dated 18.05.2026 received from respondent No.2, who is the father of the victim girl. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioners had filed Criminal Misc.No.4928/2026 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected on 16.06.2026. It is under these circumstances, the petitioners are before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the allegations found in the first information are all baseless. Petitioner No.1, who is an advocate, had appeared for the examination that was held to the post of Civil Judge and there are necessary documents to prove the same. He submits that as a matter of fact, petitioners have incurred huge expenses for the purpose of the preparation of the proposed marriage between petitioner No.1 and the daughter of first informant. He submits that a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioners at the instance of a Police Officer. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that petitioners are persons with multiple criminal antecedents of similar nature. FIR in Crime No.64/2026 and Crime No.18/2026 have been registered against the petitioners by Udayagiri Police Station and Krishnarajanagar Police Station at Mysuru. Learned HCGP submits that in addition to the aforesaid FIRs, there are multiple NCR cases registered against the petitioners with similar allegations. Since the family members of the victim girls did not want to pursue the case, NCR cases were registered and subsequently closed. They also submit that petitioner No.1 has falsely advertised in Shaadi.com website that he has a Ph.D Degree. They submit that in the event the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, they are likely to indulge in committing similar offences. Considering the nature of allegations and the background of the petitioners, their custodial interrogation becomes necessary. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.
In the first information, it is stated that the accused persons had approached the family members of the first informant after going through the profile of the victim girl, which was posted in Shaadi.com website. Petitioners allegedly represented to the family of the first informant that petitioner No.1, has a Ph.D Degree, he had appeared for the Civil Judge examination and he is likely to become a Judge. They also had represented that family of the petitioner has landed properties, though actually they did not have. Considering the representation made by the petitioners, the family of the first informant had made preparations for the marriage and also had paid a sum of 15 lakhs through bank transaction to the petitioners. Even engagement ceremony of the victim girl with the petitioner was performed at the expenses of the first informant. Subsequently, the first informant came to know that the petitioners had cheated multiple people at Mysuru and other places, and they are already facing criminal cases. It is under these circumstances, FIR was registered against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences.
Learned HCGP has produced the copy of the FIR in Crime No.18/2026 registered by Krishnarajanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 79, 318(2), 308(2), 351(2), 352 read with 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and also the copy of FIR in Crime No.64/2026 registered by Udayagiri Police Station, Mysuru for offences punishable under Sections 74, 118(1), 352 read with 3(5) of BNS 2023. In addition to the same, he has produced documents which would go to show that as many as 4 other NCR cases were registered against the petitioners, wherein there are similar allegations of cheating.
Though learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court that the further proceedings in Crime No.64/2026 has been stayed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.6184/2026, the fact remains that the said petition is pending and the proceedings are not yet quashed. Merely for the reason that further proceedings has been stayed in one of the criminal cases registered against the petitioners, it cannot be said that the petitioners are not persons with criminal antecedents, when there are sufficient materials available which discloses that they have indulged in committing similar offences as against multiple girls.
The antecedents of the accused becomes an important factor for the Court while considering bail application of such accused. Petitioners have not disclosed their antecedents before this Court.
Petitioners, who were granted bail in the earlier cases, have violated bail conditions and indulged in committing further crimes. Submission made by the learned HCGP and learned counsel for respondent No.2 that in the event petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, chances of they indulging in committing similar offences in future, cannot be, therefore, ruled out.
Considering the nature of allegations found in the first information and also the criminal history of the petitioners, who are alleged to have committed multiple crimes of similar nature, I am of the opinion that the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail, cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed.