- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102192 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: SRI. YASEEN DONI @ YASEEN S/O. AZMATH ULLA, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. ISLAMPURA, HARAPANAHALLI TOWN-583131, TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY HARAPANAHALLI P. S., REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO GRANT HIM REGULAR BAIL IN THE CRIME NO.117/2024 OF HARAPANAHALLI POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.85 AND 108 OF BNS PENDING BEFORE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-BALLARI (SITTING AT HOSAPETE) IN S.C.NO.5090/2024, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri.Neelendera D. Gunde, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 and Smt. Kirtilata Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent- State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 483 of BNSS-2023 (439 of Cr.P.C.) to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.117/2024 (SC No.5090/2024 pending on the file of III Addl. District and Sessins Judge, Ballari sitting at Hospete) of Harapanahalli Police, station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita(for short ‘BNS, 2023’). 3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: The petitioner is none other than husband of the deceased Shamshad Begum. Marriage of the petitioner - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 and the deceased solemnized on 23.04.2015. After the marriage, their relationship was cordial till the year 2022. Thereafter, petitioner and accused No.2 started harassing the deceased on account of dowry. On 10.07.2024, accused No.1 brought a grocery. However, accused No.1 abused her saying that she used to incur more expenses for purchase of grocery and household equipments and scolded her saying that go and die elsewhere. Thereafter, Shamshad Begum pored diesel on herself and set fire in between 2.30 p.m. to 3 p.m. and sustained injuries. Accused No.1 tried to extinguish the fire with the help of tower. On the same day at 5.30 p.m., he brought four ointments and applied to burn injuries. On the same day at 7 p.m. injured requested her husband to take her to hospital for taking treatment. However, he did not take her to hospital. Thus, on the following day at 4 a.m., she succumbed to the burn injuries. Hence, complainant/first informant lodged complaint, which leads to registration of FIR and investigation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. At the time of setting fire, the petitioner also attempted to extinguish the fire by applying towel on the injured. Further, before the death of deceased, she was in cordial terms with accused No.1 and thus, she herself requested the petitioner to take her to hospital for treatment. It is contended that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that there is prima facie case against the petitioner, petitioner is involved in heinous offence. If he released on bail, he would tamper the prosecution witnesses and hamper the trial and hence prays to dismiss the bail petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 6. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the relationship of accused No.1 with the deceased was cordial since 2015-2022. Thereafter, the petitioner and her family members started to harass the deceased. On the day of alleged incident, i.e. on 10.07.2024, accused No.1 took quarrel with her and abused her that she has been incurring more expenses for purchase of groceries. In this regard only, she poured diesel on herself and set fire and on the following day at 4 a.m. she succumbed to the injuries which shows that accused No.1 tried to extinguish the fire. It also reveals that soon after 5-6 hours of the incident, injured made request to the petitioner to take her to hospital for treatment. The only allegation made against the petitioner in this case is that, petitioner is harassing her frequently. 7. In order to attract Section 306 of IPC which deals with abetment of suicide, the prosecution needs to prove that the accused actively instigated or aided the deceased in committing suicide. This requires a direct and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 proximate link between the actions of the accused and the victim's suicide. Mere allegations or insults, without evidence of a direct link or intention to push the victim to suicide, are not sufficient to establish guilt under Section 306 IPC. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the prosecution must establish the ingredients of Section 306 of IPC. 8. In Ramesh Kumar Vs.State of Chaattisgarh1 the accused actively instigated or aided the deceased in committing suicide. This requires a direct and proximate link between the actions of the accused and the victim's suicide. Mere allegations or insults, without evidence of a direct link or intention to push the victim to suicide, are not sufficient to establish guilt under Section 306 IPC, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “12. In Ramesh Kumar V. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) SCC 618, this Court while considering the charge framed and the conviction for an offence under Section 306, I.P.C. on the basis of dying 1 (2001) 9 SCC 618 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 declaration recorded by an Executive Magistrate, in which she had stated that previously there had been quarrel between the deceased and her husband and on the day of occurrence she had a quarrel with her husband who had said that she could go wherever she wanted to go and that thereafter she had poured kerosene on herself and had set fire. Acquitting the accused this Court said: “A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. If it transpires to the court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and difference in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance discord and difference were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged for abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty.” 9. Considering the nature of offence, gravity of the offence and antecedents of the petitioner, the Court is of the opinion that petitioner is entitled for grant of bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8459 CRL.P No. 102192 of 2025 ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner-accused No.1 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.117/2024 of Harapanahalli Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85 and 108 of BNS-2023., on the following conditions. (i) The petitioner- accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall attend the jurisdictional Court regularly without fail. Violation of any one of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of the bail. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE HMB CT-AN, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30