- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45037 CRL.P No. 11594 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 11594 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SANTHOSH KUMAR S/O DINESH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT No. 731, 3RD MAIN ROAD VINOBANAGAR, K.G.HALLI BENGALURU – 560 045. …PETITIONER (BY MS. SWATHI R BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI JAYANTHI R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY K.G.HALLI P.S REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B ADDL. SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASED ON BAIL IN CR.No.89/2025 (SC.No.753/2025) PENDING BEFORE CCH-72, BANGALORE PERTAINING TO THE K.G.HALLI P.S. FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1), 351(2), 352 OF BNS ACT. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45037 CRL.P No. 11594 of 2025 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Cr.No.89/2025 of K.G.Halli Police Station registered for offences under Section 103(1), 351(2), 352 of BNS pending in S.C.No.753/2025 on the file of LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-72). 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional SPP for respondent/State. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that even though CWs.4 and 6 are cited as eye witnesses in the charge sheet, but they have not witnessed the incident. There is a contradiction in the dying declaration and column-17 of the charge sheet. The neighbours of the house of the deceased are not examined. There are no antecedents of the petitioner. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45037 CRL.P No. 11594 of 2025 required for custodial interrogation. With these she prayed to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, learned Additional SPP contends that in the dying declaration the deceased herself has specifically stated the acts of this petitioner pouring turpentine type of oil on her and setting fire and as a result she has sustained burn injuries. The wound certificate indicates that the deceased has sustained burn injuries. The Doctor who conducted PM examination has found that death is due to toxemia as a result of burn injuries. On the spot, the Can containing thinner has been seized under mahazar. The charge sheet material show prima-facie case against the petitioner. CW4 and CW6 are eye-witnesses to the incident who have seen the cry of the deceased when she was set fire and when she came out of the house. With these she prayed to reject the petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45037 CRL.P No. 11594 of 2025 6. The deceased, even though has married and has children, is living with the petitioner since 3 months as they were in love with each other for 3 years. The petitioner used to come drunk and used to quarrel with the deceased. On 09.03.2025 at 08.00 a.m. when the deceased came from her night duty, quarrel took place between deceased and the petitioner and petitioner stating that he will kill her has poured turpentine oil type liquid on her and set fire and she went out of the house screaming. The same has been seen by CW4 and CW6. The deceased died in hospital on 13.03.2025. The dying declaration of the deceased has been recorded by the Tahasildar on 09.03.2025, wherein deceased has stated that petitioner put turpentine oil type liquid on her and set her on fire and she came screaming out of the house and neighbours took her to the hospital in auto rickshaw. The CW4 and CW6 are eyewitnesses to the incident and they have stated regarding quarrel between the petitioner and deceased and they witnessing deceased coming out of the house with burn injuries. The doctor who conducted PM examination over - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45037 CRL.P No. 11594 of 2025 the dead body of the deceased has opined that death is due to toxemia as a result of burn injuries. Considering all these aspects there is a prima-facie case against the petitioner for offences alleged against him. If the petitioner is granted bail there is a threat to prosecution witnesses. Considering the above aspects the petitioner has not made out any case for grant of bail. In the result, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DKB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 Ct.sm