Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10222 (KAR)

BINOY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA KALAKERI POLICE STATION

CRL.P/200533/2025 · 2025-04-07

S Rachaiah

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200533 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. BINOY S/O ABRAHAM, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: FIELD PROJECT OFFICER, DHARMASTHALA GRAMABHIVRUDHI SWASAHAY SANGH HONNALLI, R/O. NO.59 JEDDINAMULLE JADKAL, DIST.UDUPI–574 118. 2. MANJUNATH S/O GAVISIDDAPPA SAJJAN, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC: FIELD SUPERVISIOR PROJECT OFFICER DHARMASTHAL GRAMABHIVRUDHI SWA-SAHAY SANGH HONNALLI, R/O. NO.3/19 GUDLANUR KATARKI, DIST. KOPPAL–583 231. 3. GURAMMA W/O MALLAYYA HIREMATH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE ASSISTANT DHARMASTHAL GRAMABHIVRUDHI SWA-SAHAY SANGH HONNALLI, R/O. SALADHALLI, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 TQ.DEVAR HIPPARAGI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNASWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, KALAKERI POLICE STATION, VIJAYAPURA, BY ITS POLICE INSPECTOR, ALSO REPRESENTED BY, ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT KALABURAGI-585 102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF BNSS PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL TO PETITIONER NO.1 TO 3/ ACCUSED NO.7 IN EVENT THEIR ARREST BY POLICE FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 108 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA 2023 IN CRIME NO.11/2025 KALAKERI P.S DISTRICT VIJAYAPUR PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SINDAGI ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS AND GROUNDS BY ALLOWING THIS INSTANT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioners are the workers at Dharmastala Gramabivruddi Swasahaya Sangha, Honnalli, anticipating their arrest in Crime No.11/2025 seeking for anticipatory bail. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant Smt. Mahadevi W/o Basanagouda lodged a complaint stating that she had landed property bearing Sy.No.47/8, measuring 4 acres 2 guntas standing in the name of Boramma, who is her mother-in-law. They obtained crop loan from Karnataka Vikasa Rural Bank, Honnalli for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-. In addition to that, she had borrowed loan at PKPS, Asantapura for a sum of Rs.65,000/-, totally Rs.4,15,000/- crop loan was raised. In all total, they obtained loan a sum of Rs.7,35,000/- at different financial institutions. The officials of the said financial institutions used to visit their house often, to recover the amount. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 3. On 06.02.2025 around 4.00 P.M., herself and her mother-in-law went to their land together by informing her husband that they would come at the earliest. The husband of the complainant was alone in the house. Around 6.30 P.M., she returned to home along with her mother-in-law. The door was partially closed, she pushed the door and went inside the house. At that time, she saw that her husband was struggling with pain. Frightening the said incident, he was shifted to hospital for treatment. While the complainant was proceeding along with the deceased to the hospital, she was told that the petitioners had been to the house of the deceased and insulted him for having not paid the installment. Consequently, he consumed pesticide for the purpose of committing suicide. 5. The deceased died in the midst of the journey. After having frightened, she asked about the reasons for his pain. She was told that the micro finance peoples scolded her husband in such a way that he has to commit suicide for having not repaid the amount. Therefore, immediately she shifted to the Government Hospital for treatment. Further, during the journey, he died. Therefore, she lodges a complaint against the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 officials of micro finance for having committed the offence under Section 108 of BNS, 2023. 6. The investigation is under progress. In the meantime, the petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. 7. Heard, Sri. Mallikarjunaswamy B. Hiremath learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 8. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the names of several micro finance institutions are mentioned in the F.I.R. The petitioners are the workers of one of the micro finance institutions. There is a reasonable apprehension of their arrest in connection with the above said case. Therefore, they may be granted anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays to allow the petition. 9. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader, vehemently opposed the said submissions and he further submitted that, though the name of the micro finance institutions have been mentioned in the FIR, the persons who actually had been to the place has to be investigated. Prima- - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2191 CRL.P No. 200533 of 2025 facie, these micro finance institutions are directly responsible for the suicide of the husband of the complainant. Therefore, they are not entitled for any relief as prayed for. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State prays to dismiss the petition. 10. Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, no doubt a complaint came to be registered by the complainant against some micro finance institutions. Though, the petitioners are claimed to be the employees of Dharmastala Gramabivruddi Swashaya Sangha, Honnalli, the over-act of the petitioners has to be assessed by proper investigation. Therefore, at this stage, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail. Hence, the bail petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRT/NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT:PK