- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101447 OF 2025 (438 OF Cr.PC/482 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. ABDUL KAREEM SAB S/O. IBRAHIM SAB SONDKE, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER. 2. SMT. FAREEDA BANU @ HASEENA BANU W/O. ABDUL KAREEM SAB SONDAKE, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE. 3. SMT. SHABHANA BANU @ SHABBU D/O. ABDUL KAREEM SAB SONDAKE, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O. HOUSE NO.18/1 MOMININ PLOT, COWLPETE HUBBALLI. ALL ARE R/O. HOUSE NO. 1 & 2, MILANA COLONY, ADHYAPAK NAGAR, VISHAL NAGAR, OLD HUBBALLI-580024. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B. ANWAR BASHA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (THROUGH P. S. OLD HUBBALLI P. S) REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT: DHARWAD-580001. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 4 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.219/2024 REGISTERED BY OLD HUBBALLI P.S. FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.80, 85, 86, 115(2), 352 R/W. SECTION 3(5) OF BNS AND SECTION 4 OF D.P. ACT, PENDING TRAIL OF THE SAID CASE, BEFORE COURT OF IV ADDL. JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 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:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. B. Anwar Basha and learned HCGP Sri. Abhishek Malipatil for the respondent 3 State. 2. The petitioners 3 accused Nos.2 to 4 have filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. [Section 482 pf Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] for the offences punishable under Sections 80, 85, 86, 115(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [BNSS] and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: Accused No.1 is the husband of the deceased. Accused No.2 and Accused No.3 are the father and mother of Accused No.1, respectively, while Accused No.4 is his - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 sister. Following the marriage, the relationship between the deceased and Accused No.1 remained cordial for a couple of years. Thereafter, the accused persons subjected the deceased to cruelty by demanding her to bring dowry from her parents house and they used to abuse the deceased in filthy language and harassed her, suspected her fidelity and they did not provide food to her. Hence, on 05.10.2024 at 06:30 p.m., the deceased committed suicide by hanging to the sealing fan. Accordingly, the first informant lodged a complaint, which led to the registration of an FIR and initiation of investigation. Apprehending their arrest at the hands of respondent 3 Police, the petitioners have filed this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is contended that there is no material on record to establish their involvement. Accused No.1 who is husband of the deceased has already been enlarged on bail. The offences - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners belong to a respectable family with a good reputation in society and are law-abiding citizens. They are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. On these grounds, the learned counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent 3 State contended that the petitioners are involved in the alleged offences. The investigation has been completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may threaten the prosecution witnesses and hamper the proceedings. Hence, he prayed for rejection of the petition for anticipatory bail. 6. Perused the material available on record. As per the case of prosecution, these petitioners have harassed the deceased, when she was alive, thereby abetted her, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 thus, she committed suicide by hanging to the ceiling fan. As per postmortem report, the opinion of Doctor is that, the death is due to strangulation. As per the statement of charge sheet witness, mainly they have stated against accused No.1 and his involvement in the case. These petitioners are in-laws of the deceased. Admittedly, in order to attract the provisions of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active or direct act on the part of the accused which led the deceased to commit suicide, leaving her with no other option. Such an act must have been intended to drive the deceased into a situation where she was compelled to end her life. 7. In the case of Kanchan Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another1 at paragraph 15, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under: 1 2021 SCC Online SC 737 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 "8Abetment9 involves mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, no one can be convicted for offence under Section 306, IPC." 8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court finds that the offence under Section 306 of the IPC, which pertains to abetment of suicide, is attracted. In the present case, based on the contents of the FIR, the complaint, and the charge sheet, a prima facie case is made out against accused No. 1. However, it is noted that accused No. 1 has already been released on statutory bail. The allegations against accused Nos.2 to 4 that, they also abetted the deceased to commit suicide, appear to be hearsay in nature. It is an admitted fact that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed by the Investigating Officer. Therefore, the apprehension of witness tampering or - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 interference with the investigation does not arise at this stage. 9. Considering the nature and gravity of the offences, the antecedents of the petitioners, and the fact that petitioner 3 Accused No.2 is a 68 years old man and the father-in-law of the deceased, accused No.3 is the mother-in-law of the deceased, and accused No.4 is the sister-in-law of the deceased, who are women folk, the Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to be granted bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The criminal petition is hereby allowed. ii. The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent 3 Police on they executing personal bonds for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with a surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/SHO. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7585 CRL.P No. 101447 of 2025 iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv. The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. v. The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court regularly without fail. Note: The observation made herein, is only for disposal of this petition. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RSH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52