- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103724 OF 2024 [438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS)] BETWEEN: 1. SHRI LAXMAN S/O. BALAPPA YADDALGUDD, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUMMARAGUDDI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590016, AADHAR NO.9550 0024 2663. 2. SHRI MARUTI BASAVANNEPPA ATUR AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MADAWAL, TAL. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-590016. AADHAR NO.2693 3294 0131. 3. SHRI SIDAGOUD BASANAGOUD PATIL AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MADAWAL, TAL. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-590016. AADHAR NO.8942 8868 6259. 4. SHRI APPANNA @ APPAYYA IRAPPA NESARAGI, AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MADAWAL, TAL. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-590016. AADHAR NO.2693 3294 0131. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.29 14:35:41 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 5. SHRI LAGAMAPPA RAMAPPA KARADIGUDDI AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KARIKATTI, TAL. BELAGAVI-591126, AADHAR NO.4762 5365 9637. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHARAD M. PATIL, ADV.) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ANKALAGI P.S., REP. BY ADDL.STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT. GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 5/ACCUSED NO.7, 9, 10, 15 AND 17 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF APPREHEND OF ARREST BY PETITIONERS MAY KINDLY BE ORDERED TO BE RELEASED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN ANKALGI P.S. CRIME NO.47/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S. 189(2), 191(2), 115(2), 133, 74, 108, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 190 OF BNS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’ for short) for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in view of registration of Crime no.47/2024 by Ankalgi Police Station for non-bailalbe offences punishable under Sections 189 (2)m 191 (2), 115 (2), 133, 74, 108, 352, 351 (2), 351 (3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short, ‘BNS), by accused no.7, 9, 10, 15 and 17 (‘petitioners’ for short) respectively. 2. Sri Sharad M. Patil, advocate for petitioners submitted petitioners were innocent, permanent residents of Tummaraguddi, Madawal and Karikatti villages holding movable and immovable properties and hailed from respectable families. It was submitted they apprehended arrest in pursuance of above mentioned false complaint, though they did not commit any offences. It was submitted even according to complainant, he was acquainted with Smt.Parvati Basappa Bannennavar and since one year, they were in love with each other. However, since few months there was some bickering between them. To - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 resolve same, meeting of elders was arranged at 12:00 p.m. on 04.09.2024 in Durgadevi Temple at Madawal village. In said meeting, Smt.Shivagangavva Navani, Smt.Parvati Bennennavar, her husband Basappa Bannennavar, Basappa Dalawayi, Balesh Navani, another son of Shivagangavva and her relatives, Laxman Yaddalaguda, Muttu Thimmannavar, elders from Iranatti and Tummarguddi villages, Maruti Alur, Siddagouda Patil, Shankareppa Vannur, Shivanand Shiggavi, Ningappa Jadar, elders from Talaginahatti village, Basavraj Karadiguddi, Appayya Nesaragi, Mallappa Nayik of Madawal village, Lagamanna Karadiguddi, Koppad Member resident of Talaginatti, Badakappa Gurav, Suresh Nayik, uncles of Smt.Parvati from Kataballi and elders from Shigiholi village were preset. Said persons abused complainant and his parents and asked them to pay Rs.15.00 lakh as compensation and also transfer agricultural land to Smt.Parvati and threatened them. 3. When complainant and his family members questioned same, they beat up complainant and his family members with slippers, hands and legs. Uncles of Smt.Parvati assaulted his father and pulled hair of his mother and outraged her modesty. When they tried to save her, Shivagangavva and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 Smt.Parvati threatened stating that even if they die, they have to pay fine and transfer land. Even Basavaraj Sutagatti, Appayya Sutagatti, Mallappa Neginal, Annappa Neginal from Madawal also joined others and not only insulted complainant and his family, but also assaulted them. Due to same, his father who was physically handicapped person, suffered mental shock for having lost reputation and expressed intention to commit suicide. However, complainant consoled him and took him home. Next day i.e., on 05.09.2024 when complainant went to Belagavi for some work and returned home at noon, he was unable to find his father at home. He along with few persons from his village searched for his father, when they were informed that complainant’s father was headed towards land of Guddad. On reaching, they saw complainant’s father was suffering discomfort with frothing at his mouth which appeared to be poison. On enquiry, he stated that due to insult suffered previous day, he had consumed poison at 2:00 p.m. Immediately he was taken for treatment to Navami Hospital at Gokak where he died on morning on 06.09.2024. Complaint was registered as Crime no.47/2024 for above mentioned offences. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 4. It was submitted, petitioners were village elders who had assembled to resolve issue between complainant and Smt.Parvati. Even according to complainant decision was taken by elders of different villages. Same could not by any measure amount to incitement of such a grave nature as to have led complainant’s father to commit suicide. Therefore petitioners were entitled for bail. It was submitted, rejection of bail petition by learned District Judge was without proper consideration. It was submitted petitioners were arraigned only to spoil their reputation and to wreck vengeance. On above grounds sought for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. On other hand Smt.Girija S.Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for State opposed petition. It was submitted petitioners no.2, 3 and 4 were also from Madawal village as complainant and in case of grant of bail there was every likelihood of threatening or influencing complainant and prosecution witnesses. It was submitted offences alleged were non-bailable and grave and since all accused had joined together in unlawful assembly, directed complainant to pay fine of Rs.15,00 lakh and transfer land to Smt. Parvati and when they refused insulted complainant and his parents, his father - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 suffered mental shock and depression which had led him to commit suicide. Allegations made would indicate commission of offences as alleged. It was submitted that investigation was pending and grant of bail was likely to scuttle investigation. On above grounds sought rejection of bail. 6. Heard learned counsel. 7. From above, only point that would arise for consideration is: Whether petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail on condition? 8. From above, it is seen petitioners’ apprehension of imminent arrest is stoked from registration of Crime no.47/2024 by Ankalgi Police Station for various non-bailable offences as stated above. 9. Bare perusal of complaint would indicate that petitioners were stated to be village elders who had gathered at Durgadevi temple for resolution of issues between complainant and Smt.Parvati Bannennavar. Though it is alleged that panchas had directed complainant to pay Rs.15.00 lakh to Smt.Parvati and also transfer land, whether prima facie same - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 would constitute inducement of such nature as would have prompted complainant’s father to commit suicide would require consideration for purpose of deciding bail petition. 10. Allegations of assault are in general with specific overt-acts only insofar as accused no.1 to 4 being assault with hands not resulting in any injuries. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mahendra Awase Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 SCC Online 107, after referring to Section 306 with Section 107 of IPC held as follows. “20. This Court has, over the last several decades, repeatedly reiterated the higher threshold, mandated by law for Section 306 IPC [Now Section 108 read with Section 45 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] to be attracted. They however seem to have followed more in the breach. Section 306 IPC appears to be casually and too readily resorted to by the police. While the persons involved in genuine cases where the threshold is met should not be spared, the provision should not be deployed against individuals, only to assuage the immediate feelings of the distraught family of the deceased. The conduct of the proposed accused and the deceased, their interactions and conversations preceding the unfortunate death of the deceased should be - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 approached from a practical point of view and not divorced from day-to-day realities of life. Hyperboles employed in exchanges should not, without anything more, be glorified as an instigation to commit suicide. It is time the investigating agencies are sensitised to the law laid down by this Court under Section 306 so that persons are not subjected to the abuse of process of a totally untenable prosecution. The trial courts also should exercise great caution and circumspection and should not adopt a play it safe syndrome by mechanically framing charges, even if the investigating agencies in a given case have shown utter disregard for the ingredients of Section 306.” 11. Prima facie, complain averments do not appear to indicate incitement of such a nature as to leave no other option to complainant’s father other than to commit suicide, though, said question would be matter for collection of evidence and establishing same during trial. Petitioners have stated that they do not have any criminal antecedents and are having movable and immovable properties and are permanent residents of Tummaraguddi, Madawal and Karikatti villages and as such unlikely to flee justice. In view of above and as concerns expressed by respondents could be addressed by imposing - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 proper conditions, points for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, following: ORDER Petition is allowed. It is ordered that petitioners/accused no.7, 9, 10, 15 and 17 shall be enlarged on bail, in case of their arrest in Crime no.47/2024 of Ankalgi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 189 (2), 191 (2), 115 (2), 133, 74, 108, 352, 351 (2), 351 (3), 190 of BNS, subject to following conditions: a) Each of Petitioners i.e. accused no.7, 9, 10, 15 and 17 shall execute personal bonds for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for likesum to satisfaction of Court. b) They shall make themselves available for purpose of investigation as and when required and co-operate with investigation. c) They shall not threaten or tamper with any prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. d) They shall not indulge in any criminal activities. e) They shall be regular in attending Court proceedings. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1596 CRL.P No. 103724 of 2024 f) They shall forthwith inform any change of their residence to Investigating Officer. g) It is clarified that views expressed are prima facie and shall not influence final outcome after trial. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE EM CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 8