- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2920 OF 2025 BETWEEN: POOJA R D/O LATE RAMANNA AGE 28 YEARS NAGARAKERE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA - 571 428 M 7353393273. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SATEESH S. KUDTARKAR, ADV.) AND: 1. ABHISHEK GOWDA S/O NEELAKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/O NAGARAKERE VILLAGE MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTIRCT - 571 428. 2. STATE BY MADDUR P.S MANDYA DIST. - 571 428 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI R.S. RAVI, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. AMBIKA M, ADV.) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.PC (483(3) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL PETITION TO FILED BY THE PETITIONER (VICTIM) U/S 483(3) OF B.N.S.S., 2023 TO CANCEL THE BALL GRANTED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10326/2024 DATED 14TH OCTOBER 2024 WHICH WAS Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 (ABHISHEK GOWDA WHO IS THE ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO. 0206/2024 I WHICH IS FILED BEFORE MADDUR POLICE STATION FOR OFFENCES U/S 376, 420, 448, 323, 504, 506 OF IPC) AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO SECURE AND ARREST RESPONDENT NO.1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. This petition under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 R/w Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C, is filed by the defacto complainant with a prayer to cancel the bail granted by this Court to respondent no.1 herein in Crl.P.No.10326/2024 by order dated 14.10.2024. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Respondent no.1 herein was arraigned as accused in Crime No.206/2024 registered by Maddur Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 420, 448, 504, 323 and 506 of IPC, based on the first information dated 06.09.2024 received from the petitioner, who is the alleged victim in the present case. In the said case he was arrested on 08.09.2024 and his bail application filed before the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.604/2024 was rejected on 24.09.2024. He therefore had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.10326/2024 seeking regular bail and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2024. Seeking cancellation of the bail granted to respondent no.1 herein in Crl.P.No.10326/2024, defacto complainant is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.1 has violated the bail conditions imposed by this Court in Crl.P.No.10326/2024. After the petitioner was released on bail he has been continuously sending threatening and vulgar messages to the victim's mobile phone. The victim therefore has filed a police complaint against the first respondent. He submits that respondent no.1 has been trying to tamper with the material prosecution witnesses. He also submits that, petitioner, who is the victim in the present case was not heard by his Court while granting bail to respondent no.1. He submits that victim has a right of being heard and in support of his arguments he has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of JAGJEET - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 SINGH & ORS V. ASHISH MISHRA @ MONU & ANR - (2022) 9 SCC 321. 5. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1 placing reliance on the statement of objection, submits that the petitioner herein has been sending threatening messages to the first respondent stating that she will be once again send him to the jail. The messages sent by the petitioner are only in retaliation to the same. Further proceedings in Crime No.206/2024 has been stayed by this Court in Criminal petition No.5920 of 2025. In the criminal case which was filed against respondent no.1 alleging that he had threatened the victim, the police, after conducting investigation have filed 'B' final report. Respondent no.1 has strictly complied all the bail conditions and he has no other criminal antecedents, Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition. 6. In the first information submitted by the petitioner herein, she has stated that she got acquainted with first respondent in the year 2015 and subsequently they had developed relationship and were living together as husband and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 wife from the year 2019 onwards. FIR in the present case was filed on 06.09.2024 alleging that the first respondent, who had promised to marry the victim had sexual intercourse with her and subsequently, he had refused to marry her. In the first information, it was also alleged that the petitioner had paid money to the first respondent and he had not repaid the same. Considering the nature of allegation found in the first information and also taking into consideration that the petitioner and first respondent were living together under the same roof for a considerable period of time, this Court had granted regular bail to respondent no.1. 7. It is the case of the petitioner that after respondent no.1 was released from jail, he has been sending vulgar and threatening messages to the petitioner. Along with the statement of objection filed on behalf of the first respondent, he has produced the printout of messages that were sent by the petitioner to him. In the said messages petitioner has threatened the first respondent that she will be sending him to jail once again and she also has used filthy language. According - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 to first respondent, only in retaliation he also has sent some messages to the petitioner. 8. It is relevant to notice here that after first respondent was released from jail the petitioner had filed a complaint against him on 20.02.2025 in Crime No.36/2025 alleging that he was sending threatening and vulgar messages to her. The Maddur police after conducting investigation of said complaint in Crime No.36 of 2025 have filed a 'B' final report, which is also available along with the statement of objection filed on behalf of the first respondent. Therefore, the allegation by the petitioner that first respondent has been sending vulgar and threatening messages to her mobile phone is not substantiated by any evidence. 9. Petitioner has also submitted that first respondent has been making attempts to tamper with the charge sheet witnesses. However, there is absolutely no material produced before this Court in support of such allegation. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the victim was not made as a party in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 Crl.P.No.10326/2024 in which first respondent was granted regular bail by this Court and therefore in view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of JAGJEET SINGH (supra), the said order cannot be sustained. 11. Undisputedly, the petitioner has not filed any application either before the Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.604/2024 or before this Court in Crl.P.No.10326/2024 opposing the bail application filed by first respondent. 12. In the case of JAGJEET SINGH (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the victim as defined under Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is entitled to be heard at the stage of adjudication of bail application of an accused. 13. In the said case, the victim had come on record for the purpose of opposing the bail application and during the course of the online proceedings, learned counsel for the victim was disconnected and was not heard by the High Court. Thereafter, an application for re-hearing the bail application - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 was filed on the said ground. But the High Court had refused to consider the same and had granted bail to the accused. It is under these circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the High Court was not justified in granting bail to the accused without hearing the victims who have a right of hearing. The same is not the fact situation in the present case. 14. In the event the victim files an application at any stage of the criminal case, his or her right to be heard has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of each JAGJEETH SINGH (supra) and the same is followed by this Court. However, that does not mean that in every bail application, the victim is required to be made as a party and notice has to be issued to the victim before the bail application is heard. For certain grave offences, the statutes themselves provide for a right of being heard to the victim or his / her relatives and only in such cases there is a mandatory requirement of hearing the victim or his / her relatives. In such cases the Courts are required to issue notice of hearing either to the victim or his / her relatives before considering the bail application of an accused. Such a procedure is not required to - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 be followed for all the offences and the same is required to be followed only if the statute specifically mandates such a requirement. However, irrespective of the offences in a case if the victim comes forward before the court and seeks an opportunity of being heard, then in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of JAGJEETH SINGH (supra), such a request cannot be rejected. 15. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that, further proceedings in S.C.No.36/2025 pending before Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FTSC-II (Spl. Courts) at Mandya arising out of Crime No.206/2024 registered by Maddur Police Station against the respondent no.1 herein in which he has been granted regular bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.10326/2024 has been now stayed by the coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5920/2025. The same is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 16. Under these circumstances, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition to cancel the regular bail granted to respondent no.1 by this Court in Crl.P.No.10326/2024 on 14.10.2024. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30016 CRL.P No. 2920 of 2025 17. Accordingly, criminal petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47