- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102644 OF 2025 (438OF Cr.PC/482 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. ALLABAKSH S/O. MAKATUMSAB DAFEDAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS. R/O. WARD NO.6, DEVARAJ NAGAR, TERADAL, TALUK: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587315. 2. HAMEEDABAI W/O. APPALAL DALAYAT, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. WARD NO.6, DEVARAJ NAGAR, TERADAL, TALUK: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT - 587 315. 3. ABDULAJEEJ S/O. APPALAL DALAYAT AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK. R/O. WARD NO.6, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 DEVARAJ NAGAR, TERADAL, TALUK: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT - 587 315. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI S. C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PSI TERADAL POLICE STATION, TERADAL - 587 315 TALUK: RABAKAVI -BANAHATTI DISTRICT: BAGALKOT BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KEERTILATA PATIL, H.C.G.P) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO DIRECT TERADAL P.S. TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.0049/2025 DATED 14.05.2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 326(G) AND 49 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA (BNS), 2023, VIDE DOCUMENT NO.2, PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. COURT, BAHANATTI AND ETC. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) ] The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.49 of 2025 of Teradal Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 326(g) and 49 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, the complainant and accused No.1 are the husband and wife. There is civil dispute pending between them in respect of suit schedule property and both are residing separately. On 13.05.2025 at about 03.00 p.m., when the first informant was in her paan shop, accused No.1, at instigation of accused Nos.2 and 3, with an intention to kill the first informant, set fire to the paan shop. Hence, the first informant sustained burn injuries and she sustained loss to the tune of Rs.3.00 lakh. Hence, she lodged a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 complaint, which led to registration of First Information Report and investigation. Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent-Police, the petitioners have filed this petition. 3. Heard Sri S.C. Bhuti, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Smt. Kirtilata Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offences. The alleged offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. There is civil dispute between the parties and hence, the petitioners have been falsely implicated by the complainant. In fact, accused No.1 is the owner of paan shop and the Civil Court has granted temporary injunction in his favour against the complainant. He further contended that the complainant had set fire when accused No.1 was sitting in his paan shop. Hence, he sustained injuries on his face and hand. The petitioners are ready to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 abide by any of the conditions to be imposed by this court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State has contended that the petitioners are involved in heinous offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They set fire to the paan shop of the de facto complainant and caused loss to the tune of Rs.3.00 lakh. Hence, there is prima-facie material against the petitioners. If the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, there is likelihood of they tampering with the prosecution witnesses and hampering the trial. Hence, she prayed to reject the petition. 6. Perused the material available on record, it appears that there is property dispute between the complainant and the accused persons. The first informant is none other than the wife of accused No.1. As per the case of the prosecution, when the de facto complainant was sitting in her paan shop, accused No.1, at instigation of accused Nos.2 and 3, poured petrol on the shop and set - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 fire. However, the first informant has not furnished any Wound Certificate to substantiate that she suffered burn injuries. On the other hand, the first informant herself has disclosed that accused No.1 sustained injuries on his face and other parts of the body. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the complainant herself set fire, when accused No.1 was sitting in the paan shop, as he is running paan shop and the Civil Court has granted injunction in his favour. From the perusal of the material on record, it shows that the complainant is out of danger and therefore, the ingredients of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, would not be attracted, at this juncture. The alleged offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life and there is civil litigation pending between the parties. The petitioners are none other than the husband and in-laws of the de facto complainant and their presence can be easily secured by imposing suitable conditions. Considering the nature of offences and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 circumstance of the case, more particularly, the allegations leveled against the petitioners, the Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R Criminal petition is allowed. The respondent-Police Station are directed to release the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.49 of 2025 of Teradal Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 326(g) and 49 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each (Rupees one lakh only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Station House Officer; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 ii. The petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer/Station House Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, for the purpose of investigation; iv. The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly; v. The petitioners shall mark their attendance before Investigating Officer/Station House Officer on the first Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. for a period of six months or till filing of charge- sheet, whichever is earlier, and - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9009 CRL.P No. 102644 of 2025 vi. The petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offences. If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to move the Court for cancellation of bail. Note: The observation made herein is only for disposal of the petition. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6