Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104031 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS)) BETWEEN:
1. SUJATHA HANDI, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, RESIDENT OF CHALUKYA NAGAR, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580029.
2. PRITHVI, AGE. 21 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, RESIDENT OF CHALUKYA NAGAR, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580029.
3. MARIYADAS YESHAMALA,
Digitally signed by SAMREEN AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE, AYUB DESHNUR RESIDENT OF CHALUKYA NAGAR, Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580029. DHARWAD BENCH …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KESHAVAPUR POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI, REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEEN Y.DEVAREDDI, HCGP) -2- THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. (U/SEC. 482 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO, GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1, 3 AND 4 ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN KESHAVAPUR POLICE STATION CRIME NO.133/2025 TO ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE 109(1), 115(2), 352, 118(1), 3(5) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA (BNS), 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2ND JMFC, AT: HUBBALLI, BY IMPOSING CONDITIONS IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) The petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in respect of Crime No. 133 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 118(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20231. Brief facts of the case are as under:
2. The case of the prosecution is that on
17.08.2025 at about 09.00 p.m., the complainant lodged a complaint stating that he had been to the shop to bring eggs. By that time, accused No.2-Chanti abruptly came and For short, BNS, 2023 -3-
assaulted by hands on the head of the complainant. The petitioner No.2 also assaulted the complainant, pushed him and fell him on the ground. When the complainant asked as to why he was being assaulted, the accused chased him. Thereafter, when the complainant was on the way to home, the petitioner No.1 called him over phone and enquired as to why he assaulted petitioner No.2 and threatened him. When he came near home, the petitioners and accused No.2 in order to enquire as to why the quarrel had taken place again started quarrelling with the complainant. Thereafter, the petitioner No.1 squeezed his testicles in order to commit murder and also pressing the neck by hand. As such, all the
petitioners had committed offences as stated in the complaint.
3. The complainant after obtaining the treatment
from the hospital lodged a complaint. The respondent-police registered a case in Crime No.133/2025 for the offences stated supra. The matter is pending for consideration. -4-
4. Heard Sri.Gouri Shankar Mot, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Praveen Y.Devareddi, learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioners that, petty reasons resulted in quarrelling with each other. There is a case and counter case. Though, it is stated in the complaint that, the petitioner No.1 who is a lady aged about 35 years squeezed the testicles with an intention to commit murder of the the complainant and also pressed his neck. No wound certificate is produced so far to demonstrate the said incident.
6. In the absence of wound certificate, registering
the case for the offence punishable under Section 109 of BNS, 2023 cannot be sustained. However, the respondent- police in order to implicate the petitioners in a false case, registered for the above-said offences and tried to arrest them. Therefore, they are seeking intervention of this Court and also for grant of anticipatory bail.
-5-
7. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently
submitted that the overt acts of the petitioners have been attributed specifically in the complaint. There might be a delay in lodging in the complaint. The delay has been explained in the complaint that the complainant had been to
the hospital for treatment, thereafter, he lodged a complaint. In the meantime, the petitioner No.1 had lodged a complaint against the complainant and others. The same has been registered in Crime No.132/2025. The delay in lodging the complaint itself is not a ground to grant a relief as prayed for. Therefore, the petition has to be rejected. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP prays to dismiss the petition.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint.
9. It appears in the complaint that case and counter case on the same incident had been registered before the jurisdictional police. -6-
10. The petitioner No.1 is a woman aged about 35
years. Petitioner No.2 is a student aged about 21 years. Petitioner No.3 is working in a private sector aged about 25 years. All are stated to have committed the respective acts, namely, petitioner No.2 while quarrelling with the complainant, squeezed his testicles and also pressed his neck. Petitioner No.2, who is accused No.2, assaulted the complainant with stone on his right hand. Petitioner No.3 who is accused No.3 was present in the said place.
11. Having considered the facts of the case and also the overt-act of the petitioners, I am of the considered opinion that, the petitioners have made out a case for bail as prayed for.
12. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed. ii) The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.133/2025 of Keshvapur Police Station pending on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, -7- Dharwad, on executing the personal bonds in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions:-
(a) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation as and when required.
(b) The petitioners shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses.
(c) The petitioners shall not commit similar or any other offences till disposal of the case. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMM / CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13 -8-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
[SUJATHA HANDI AND OTHERS VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA] 06.11.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER ON ‘BEING SPOKEN TO’ Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. In the operative portion of the Order dated 13.10.2025, at Line No.3 of sub-para (ii) at page No.6, the words “I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad”, shall be deleted by substituting the words “II JMFC, Hubballi”.
This order shall be read in conjunction with the order
dated 13.10.2025.
Registry to issue fresh free certified copy of the order
to the parties. Sd/- ( S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMM / List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1