Premium

Karnataka HC grants bail to Bescom employee accused in Rs 3.5 crore material shortage case

Allowing bail to the assistant storekeeper with the Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company, the Karnataka High Court noted that he was disabled and had no criminal history.

2 min readJan 3, 2026 07:00 PM IST

The counsel for the petitioner argued before the bench that there were contradictory allegations in the complaint with regard to the total value of the loss.

Taking note of his disabled status and lack of criminal antecedents, the Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to an employee of the Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company (Bescom) who has been accused in a case pertaining to the absence of over Rs 3 crore worth of stored material belonging to the firm. The order was passed on December 17 by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar.

The accused petitioner, Arun Kumar, is an assistant storekeeper with Bescom. During an internal audit of stored items in 2025, a shortage of materials and oil was discovered, which allegedly amounted to a loss of Rs 3.57 crore. A case was registered against him under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) sections relating to criminal breach of trust and cheating at Bengaluru’s Harihara Town police station.

The counsel for the petitioner argued before the bench that there were contradictory allegations in the complaint with regard to the total value of the loss. It was also pointed out that the accused was only an assistant storekeeper, whereas the storekeeper had not been mentioned in the complaint as an accused. The counsel also pointed out the disabled status of the petitioner, adding that the internal audit was carried out between March 18 and 31, 2025, when the petitioner was admitted in hospital.

On the other hand, the prosecution argued that with the loss of over Rs 3 crore in public money, the petitioner was absconding and his custodial interrogation was necessary. The court did not agree with these contentions, taking several other factors into account.

The court stated, “The petitioner was working as an Assistant Store Keeper and he is a handicapped person. The petitioner has undertaken to cooperate with the Investigation Officer in the investigation and abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court. The offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life and the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents.”

Having made these observations, the court granted the petitioner anticipatory bail, subject to him appearing before the investigating officer, cooperating with the investigation, and executing a bail bond for Rs 1 lakh. He was also directed not to threaten either the complainant or witnesses in the case.