Rakesh Shetty gets interim anticipatory bail in leaked video case

Bengaluru

Power TV Managing Director Rakesh Shetty was granted interim anticipatory bail by a Bengaluru court on Friday in a cybercrime case linked to the controversial video that triggered a political storm in Karnataka. The relief will protect him from arrest until the disposal of his main anticipatory bail petition, subject to conditions imposed by the court.

The LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, allowed Shetty’s interim bail application on October 23, observing that reasonable grounds existed to grant him interim anticipatory bail, particularly in view of his appearance before the police for investigation and his undertaking to cooperate with the investigating officer.

The order, however, does not grant him absolute anticipatory bail. The court has directed that notice be issued to the Public Prosecutor and sought objections by October 30, 2026.

The case is registered as Crime No. 56/2026 at the Cyber Crime Police Station for alleged offences under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 61, 308(6), 336(4) and 340(2), read with Section 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Court notes Shetty’s appearance before police

In his interim bail application, Shetty contended that his name did not figure in the first information report (FIR) and that he had initially appeared at the police station for interrogation and cooperated with the investigation.

His counsel also submitted that the police had obtained his signatures at the police station without initially providing copies of the relevant notice. According to the submission recorded in the order, Shetty received a copy of a notice issued under Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) after insisting on one.

The order records that the police issued a notice dated October 20, 2026, directing him to appear on October 21 at 11.30 am, along with his mobile phone, laptop and other electronic equipment, in connection with the cybercrime investigation.

Shetty’s counsel told the court that a letter was submitted on October 22 seeking two days’ time for him to appear before the police on October 24 for investigation.

The defence argued that Shetty was unconnected with the allegations relating to the offences invoked in the case and apprehended arrest and detention. His counsel maintained that he was entitled to interim anticipatory bail while his main petition remained pending.

Allegations concerning YouTube broadcast

The court order records the complaint’s allegation that content was telecast on the Freedom TV Kannada YouTube channel under the heading “LIVE Biggest CD blast in Karnataka Politics?” with the alleged intention of damaging the complainant’s personal dignity in public and political life.

The complaint Siddaramaiah) is linked to the controversy surrounding the circulation of a video that has drawn political attention in Karnataka.

During the hearing, Shetty’s counsel contended that he was not the owner, creator or administrator of the YouTube channel named Karnataka Honey Trap. 

The defence submitted that the channel had been created and was being operated by someone else, and that Shetty was the managing director of the television channel.

These are submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and recorded in the order; they are not findings by the court establishing who created, operated or published the disputed material.

Conditions attached to interim bail

While allowing the application, the court imposed four conditions on Shetty.

First, he must execute a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh and furnish a surety for an equivalent amount in the event of his arrest by the respondent police.

Second, he must cooperate with the investigating officer during the investigation.

Third, he must not tamper with prosecution witnesses.

Fourth, he must surrender if he fails to obtain an absolute anticipatory bail order.

The court’s decision was based on the limited question of interim protection pending consideration of the main anticipatory bail petition. It noted that Shetty had appeared before the police for investigation and had undertaken to continue cooperating.

The court subsequently directed that notice be issued to the Public Prosecutor on the bail petition and interim order, with the matter listed for objections by October 30, 2026.

The order therefore provides Shetty with temporary protection against arrest but leaves the question of absolute anticipatory bail to be decided in the pending proceedings.