- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 8284 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SATYAVATHI BALLA W/O. SHRI. PRABHAKARA C BALLA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS AD-181, ALPHA TOWER, KODIGEHALLI, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BANGALORE - 560 064. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAJI H. MANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Digitally signed ANTI-CORRUPTION BRANCH,by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA NO. 36, BELLARY RD, GANGANAGAR, Location: HIGH BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 032COURT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, LHO CAMPUS, NO. 65, ST. MARKS ROAD, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY GENERAL MANAGER. 3. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, CIRCLE SASTRA, CIRCLE OFFICE, RAHEJA TOWERS, 26-27, MG ROAD, BENGALURU EAST, BANGALORE - 560 001 REP. BY ASST. GENERAL MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT. H.S. HEMAVATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SUSPEND THE LOOK OUT CIRCULAR ISSUED AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY R1

TO R3 FOR THE LIMITED PERIOD FROM 10/03/2026 TO 25/06/2025 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY IN 'B' GROUP HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Suspend the Look Out Circular issued against the Petitioner by Respondent Nos.1 to 3 for the limited period from 10.03.2026 to 25.06.2026. b. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to intimate the Bureau of Immigration and the Nodal Officer through email at [email protected], about the suspension of the LOC, so as to enable the Petitioner to travel abroad. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 c. Pass such any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be also passed in favour of the Petitioner. 2. Petitioner claims to be one of the Directors of M/s. Deepak Cables India Pvt. Ltd. as regards whom the complaints have been registered by the respondent/CBI in FIRs in R.C.No.3(E)/2021 and R.C.No.6(E)/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 13(2), further read with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In both the cases, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3.

3. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has been filed, and the case has been numbered as C.C.No.28177/2025 which is pending on the file of the XVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru. The petitioner has also been enlarged on bail in both said proceedings. A Look-Out Circular (LOC) has been issued by the Immigration Authorities. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for temporary suspension of the LOC since the petitioner has been permitted to travel abroad by way of the order dated 25.02.2026 in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 C.C.No.28177/2025. The operative portion of the order reads as under: "CONDITIONS 1. The accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond of Rs.5,00,000/- with regard to traveling USA for the period from 25.02.2026 to 25.05.2026 assuring to return to India and shall also deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before this Court. 2. The accused No.3 shall give the particulars of her personal property owned by her to the Court, so that, this Court can initiate proceedings under Section 83 of Cr.P.C. to confiscate or forfeit the property to the Court. 3. The accused No.3 shall furnish an undertaking to this Court before the date of travel that she will return to India on 25.05.2026 and she shall be available on all dates of hearings before the Court.

4. The accused No.3 shall furnish the entire itinerary regarding her travel and stay in USA before this Court, prior to traveling abroad. 5. The accused No.3 shall file a report on returning to India within one week from 25.05.2026 after returning from USA. 6. The accused No.3 shall furnish her mobile number, email and other contact details to CBI-BSFB Bengaluru during her travel period from 25.02.2026 to 25.05.2026 and update her whereabouts to the CBI. 7. The accused No.3 shall not shift herself to any country other than USA except India, without written permission of the Court till conclusion of the trial and accused No.3 shall attend before this Court whenever called to do so. 8. The accused No.3 is permitted to get her passport for her interim custody. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 9. The accused No.3 shall surrender her passport to the Court within one week from 25.05.2026 after returning from USA. 10.Office to return the passport to the accused No.3 for her interim custody after compliance of the order. For compliance." 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the order passed by the Court seized of the criminal proceedings, the LOC was not suspended, thereby impeding the petitioner's right to travel.

5. Even though the trial Court has granted permission specifically to the petitioner to travel to the USA for a limited period from 25.02.26 to 25.05.2026, the submission is that the petitioner continues to be ready and willing to comply with all the conditions which had been imposed in the aforesaid order but could not so comply on account of the respondents continuing with the LOC. 6. The submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 is that the petitioner being a US national, there is a possibility of the petitioner being a flight risk, and it is for that reason that the LOC was not lifted. 7. The submission of counsel for respondent No.2 is that there are large amounts of money which are involved in the said offences, and if the petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 were to travel abroad, those monies would be put at risk. 8. An application having been filed by the petitioner in C.C.No.28177/2025. The said application was considered after hearing the Public Prosecutor. The Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the CBI, which in turn would also amount to him appearing on behalf of the defacto complainant as respondent Nos.2 and 3.

9. The Public Prosecutor having been heard, the trial Court has passed the order permitting the petitioner who is accused No.3 therein to travel to the USA for a limited period of time. Once an order has been passed by a Court of law, it is but required for everyone to comply with the said order. It is not open for any of the respondents to contend that despite the order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner is a flight risk and/or that since large amounts of money are involved, the petition ought not to be permitted to travel and/or that the conditions imposed are meagre in nature. As indicated supra, once an order is passed by the Court it is for all the parties to comply with the same unless an appeal is filed challenging the said order. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 10. In the present case, the order has been passed on 25.02.2026, there is no particular appeal nor an application to recall the order which has been filed by the respondents. The respondents of their own have continued the LOC, which they ought not to have continued and ought to have suspended, as per the orders passed by the trial Court.

11. It is, however, now to be noted that the time period during which the petitioner was permitted to travel has expired, and the permission is no longer in existence. It would be for the petitioner to once again apply to the trial Court for fresh permission, and if such permission were to be granted, for the respondents to comply by suspending the LOC for the period for which the petitioner is permitted to travel by the trial Court. 12. With the above observations petition stands disposed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 8284 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SATYAVATHI BALLA W/O. SHRI. PRABHAKARA C BALLA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS AD-181, ALPHA TOWER, KODIGEHALLI, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BANGALORE - 560 064. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAJI H. MANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Digitally signed ANTI-CORRUPTION BRANCH,by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA NO. 36, BELLARY RD, GANGANAGAR, Location: HIGH BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 032COURT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, LHO CAMPUS, NO. 65, ST. MARKS ROAD, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY GENERAL MANAGER. 3. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, CIRCLE SASTRA, CIRCLE OFFICE, RAHEJA TOWERS, 26-27, MG ROAD, BENGALURU EAST, BANGALORE - 560 001 REP. BY ASST. GENERAL MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT. H.S. HEMAVATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SUSPEND THE LOOK OUT CIRCULAR ISSUED AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY R1

TO R3 FOR THE LIMITED PERIOD FROM 10/03/2026 TO 25/06/2025 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY IN 'B' GROUP HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Suspend the Look Out Circular issued against the Petitioner by Respondent Nos.1 to 3 for the limited period from 10.03.2026 to 25.06.2026. b. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to intimate the Bureau of Immigration and the Nodal Officer through email at [email protected], about the suspension of the LOC, so as to enable the Petitioner to travel abroad. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 c. Pass such any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be also passed in favour of the Petitioner. 2. Petitioner claims to be one of the Directors of M/s. Deepak Cables India Pvt. Ltd. as regards whom the complaints have been registered by the respondent/CBI in FIRs in R.C.No.3(E)/2021 and R.C.No.6(E)/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 13(2), further read with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In both the cases, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3.

3. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has been filed, and the case has been numbered as C.C.No.28177/2025 which is pending on the file of the XVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru. The petitioner has also been enlarged on bail in both said proceedings. A Look-Out Circular (LOC) has been issued by the Immigration Authorities. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for temporary suspension of the LOC since the petitioner has been permitted to travel abroad by way of the order dated 25.02.2026 in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 C.C.No.28177/2025. The operative portion of the order reads as under: "CONDITIONS 1. The accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond of Rs.5,00,000/- with regard to traveling USA for the period from 25.02.2026 to 25.05.2026 assuring to return to India and shall also deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before this Court. 2. The accused No.3 shall give the particulars of her personal property owned by her to the Court, so that, this Court can initiate proceedings under Section 83 of Cr.P.C. to confiscate or forfeit the property to the Court. 3. The accused No.3 shall furnish an undertaking to this Court before the date of travel that she will return to India on 25.05.2026 and she shall be available on all dates of hearings before the Court.

4. The accused No.3 shall furnish the entire itinerary regarding her travel and stay in USA before this Court, prior to traveling abroad. 5. The accused No.3 shall file a report on returning to India within one week from 25.05.2026 after returning from USA. 6. The accused No.3 shall furnish her mobile number, email and other contact details to CBI-BSFB Bengaluru during her travel period from 25.02.2026 to 25.05.2026 and update her whereabouts to the CBI. 7. The accused No.3 shall not shift herself to any country other than USA except India, without written permission of the Court till conclusion of the trial and accused No.3 shall attend before this Court whenever called to do so. 8. The accused No.3 is permitted to get her passport for her interim custody. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 9. The accused No.3 shall surrender her passport to the Court within one week from 25.05.2026 after returning from USA. 10.Office to return the passport to the accused No.3 for her interim custody after compliance of the order. For compliance." 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the order passed by the Court seized of the criminal proceedings, the LOC was not suspended, thereby impeding the petitioner's right to travel.

5. Even though the trial Court has granted permission specifically to the petitioner to travel to the USA for a limited period from 25.02.26 to 25.05.2026, the submission is that the petitioner continues to be ready and willing to comply with all the conditions which had been imposed in the aforesaid order but could not so comply on account of the respondents continuing with the LOC. 6. The submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 is that the petitioner being a US national, there is a possibility of the petitioner being a flight risk, and it is for that reason that the LOC was not lifted. 7. The submission of counsel for respondent No.2 is that there are large amounts of money which are involved in the said offences, and if the petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 were to travel abroad, those monies would be put at risk. 8. An application having been filed by the petitioner in C.C.No.28177/2025. The said application was considered after hearing the Public Prosecutor. The Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the CBI, which in turn would also amount to him appearing on behalf of the defacto complainant as respondent Nos.2 and 3.

9. The Public Prosecutor having been heard, the trial Court has passed the order permitting the petitioner who is accused No.3 therein to travel to the USA for a limited period of time. Once an order has been passed by a Court of law, it is but required for everyone to comply with the said order. It is not open for any of the respondents to contend that despite the order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner is a flight risk and/or that since large amounts of money are involved, the petition ought not to be permitted to travel and/or that the conditions imposed are meagre in nature. As indicated supra, once an order is passed by the Court it is for all the parties to comply with the same unless an appeal is filed challenging the said order. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36150 WP No. 8284 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010187722026 10. In the present case, the order has been passed on 25.02.2026, there is no particular appeal nor an application to recall the order which has been filed by the respondents. The respondents of their own have continued the LOC, which they ought not to have continued and ought to have suspended, as per the orders passed by the trial Court.

11. It is, however, now to be noted that the time period during which the petitioner was permitted to travel has expired, and the permission is no longer in existence. It would be for the petitioner to once again apply to the trial Court for fresh permission, and if such permission were to be granted, for the respondents to comply by suspending the LOC for the period for which the petitioner is permitted to travel by the trial Court. 12. With the above observations petition stands disposed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43