- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101097 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: KURUBARA SHARANAMMA D/O. KALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. LABOURER, R/O. 6TH WARD, NEAR AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLE, GADIGANOORUM, HOSAPETE, VIJAYANGAR. …PETITIONER (BY SMT.SOUBHAGYA S. VAKKUNDI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH INSPECTOR HOSAPETE RURAL POLICE STATION, R/BY. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BECNH. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND PASS AN ORDER TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.2) ON BAIL UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNS 2023 IN HOSAPETE RURAL PS CRIME NO. 192/2024 PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT HOSAPETE VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103 (1) 54, 49, 3(5) OF BNS 2023. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.28 10:42:00 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Smt. Soubhagya S. Vakkund, learned counsel for petitioner and. Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 2. Petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C./483 of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the following prayer: “To allow this Criminal Petition and pass an Order to release the Petitioner (Accused No.2) on bail under Section 483 of BNS 2023 in Hosapete Rural PS Crime No. 192/2024 Principal. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and JMFC Court Hosapete Vijayanagar District for the offence punishable under Sections 103 (1) 54, 49, 3(5) of BNS 2023.” 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for the disposal of the petition are as under: Mailarappa, being the father of Smt. Shruti lodged a complaint with Hosapete Rural Police on 09.09.2024 alleging the commission of offences by the petitioner and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 others punishable under Sections 103(1), 54, 49 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’, for short). 3.1 Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that Shruti was married in November, 2015 with Meti Ramalingappa, accused No.1. Present petitioner is the accused No.2, who had adopted accused No.1. 3.2 Complaint was also lodged against Devirappa and Nagamma who are the relatives of first accused. It is further found from the complaint averments that three months earlier to the incident, there was harassment to Smt. Shruti suspecting fidelity. Pursuant to the same, there was bickering in the matrimonial relationship and same was patched up by holding panchayats and Shruti was sent back to the matrimonial home. 3.3 When the matter stood thus, there was an intimation to the complainant that Shruti is not well and immediately the complainant rushed to the house of the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 accused. On enquiry, accused Nos.1 and 2 and others told that Shruti is lying in the bedroom. When complainant went there, he found that Shruti was no more and he enquired the accused No.1. Initially accused No.1 told that she died out of heart attack and later on he said to have admitted that he has throttled Shruti. Thereafter, complaint came to be filed. 3.4 Police after thorough investigation, filed the charge sheet against accused persons. Petitioner is the accused No.2 in the incident. The request made by the petitioner to obtain an order of bail was turned down by the learned Trial Judge. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Smt. Soubhagya S. Vakkund, learned counsel for petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition vehemently contended that role of the present petitioner is only to the extent that she has instigated the accused No.1. Since the petitioner being a lady who adopted the accused No.1, had no role whatsoever in the alleged - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 incident and since the charge sheet is filed, continuation of the petitioner in the judicial custody is no longer warranted. Accordingly, she sought for allowing the petition. 5. Per contra, Smt. Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent opposes the bail grounds. 6. Having heard the arguments of both the sides in detail, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 7. On such perusal of the material on record, even according to the case of the prosecution, the only role that has been attributed to the present petitioner is instigating the accused No.1 to commit the murder of Shruti by throttling her. Postmortem report prima facie establishes that the death of Shruti is due to throttling. 8. Taking note of the fact that the charge sheet is filed and role assigned to the present petitioner is only to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 the extent of instigating the accused No.1 and the petitioner being a lady, continuation of the petitioner in the judicial custody is no longer warranted. 9. The other apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable and stringent conditions including observation regarding parity insofar as other accused persons are concerned. Accordingly, the following order is passed. ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) Petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- [Rupees Fifty Thousand only] with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. (iii) Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner. (iv) Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly. (v) Grant of bail to the present petitioner shall not ipso facto be treated as parity insofar as - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5642 CRL.P No. 101097 of 2025 the bail requests of other accused persons are concerned. (vi) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Ballari/Vijayanagar District without prior permission. Violation of any of the above conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE NAA CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14