Karnataka High Court
Mansoor M vs State Of Karnataka on 10 January, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10360 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. MANSOOR M,
S/O HASSAINAR,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT D.NO.2-117C,
MUKHARI MOOLE HOUSE,
KAVU POST, MADNOORU, PUTTUR,
D.K.DISTRICT - 574 223.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.DHANANJAY KUMAR., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
CEN CRIME POLICE STATION,
MANGALURU.
Digitally signed by REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.,
MOHANKUMAR
M HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Location: High
Court Of BANGALORE - 560 001.
Karnataka
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K.RAHUL RAI, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS
ARREST IN CR.NO.85/2022 REGISTERED BY CEN CRIME
-2-
CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022
POLICE STATION, MANGALURU CITY, D.K. DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 66(C) AND 66(D) OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2008 AND SECTION 153A OF IPC PENDING
ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.85/2022 of CEN Crime Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 66(d) and 66(c) of Information Technology Act, (for short, 'the Act') and Section 153-A of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Sri. Pushparaj B.N.
2. Heard Sri. Dhananjay Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.Rahul Rai, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials placed on record.
-3-CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused. He is innocent and law abiding citizen. He has not committed any offence as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He is having reasonable apprehension of being arrested by the Police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is the authorized user of the website by name "Varthabharathi". He published news in Malayalam in News 18.Com on 04.09.2022, which is translated and telecasted in Kannada on 05.09.2022. None of the provisions invoked are applicable to the facts of the case. The petitioner is not running a fake channel nor telecasted any fake news. But on the other hand, such news was telecasted widely in all the news channels. The petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. He is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the -4- CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022 cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition in the interest of justice.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offence. He created a fake website in the name and style "Varthabharathi', it was in fact being run authorisedly by the complainant. By using the fake website, fake news were being telecasted, which leads to disturbance of the communal harmony at the sensitive areas. In this regard, a detailed investigation is to be conducted by the Investigating Officer. He is absconding since the date of the registration of the case. There are prima facie materials in support of the allegations. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he may never turn up before the Investigating Officer and he may abscond or -5- CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022 may commit similar offences, threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
7. Serious allegation made against the petitioner that he has telecasted fake news through the fake website. The allegations are of serious nature, which requires detailed investigation. However, at this stage, nothing is placed on record to contend that the petitioner -6- CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022 is required for interrogation. However, if the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation, the investigating officer will be at liberty to seek for the same with the prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
8. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.85/2022 of CEN Crime Police Station.
The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of -7- CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022 receipt of this order and on his appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge him on bail subject to the following conditions:-
a. The petitioner shall furnish the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;
b. The petitioner shall not commit similar offences;
c. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required;
d. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses; and e. Investigating Officer is at liberty to subject the petitioner for interrogation, in case of necessity, with prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will -8- CRL.P No. 10360 of 2022 be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE MKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54