- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6963/2025 (439(2)(Cr.PC) / 483(3)(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. SHABNAM BANU W/O SHABBIR PASHA D/O MR. MOHAMMED SAJJAD SAIT SAHIB AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO.287, 12TH A CROSS UMAR NAGAR, GOVINDAPURA BENGALURU -560064. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AKRAM PASHA K, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. SHABBIR PASHA S/O ABDUL BASHEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT. NOOR KHAN AND SONS NO.773, HOOR SOUTH STREET FATHIMA GALLI ROAD NEELASANDRA, BENGALURU-560047. 2. STATE BY SAMPIGEHALLI PS REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHABBIR PASHA, RESPONDENT NO.1 SERVED ON 02.09.2025 SRI. THEJESH P, HCGP FOR R2) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.PC (FILED U/S 483(3) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.04.2025 IN CRL.MISC.NO.176/2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-46) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 118(1),329(3),351(2),85 OF BNS 2023 IN CR.NO.621/2024 OF SAMPIGEHALLI P.S. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 06.04.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CAV JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS') challenging the order dated 19.04.2025 passed by the learned XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-46) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court') in Crl. Misc. No. 176/2025. 2. Though the respondent No.1 has been served, there is no representation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 3. Heard Sri.Akram Pasha K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Thejesh P., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.2. 4. The material on record indicates that Crime No.621/2024 was registered against the respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 329(3), 351(2) and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNS'). Pursuant to the same, the respondent No.1 filed a petition under Section 482 of the BNSS in Crl. Misc.No.11031/2024 seeking anticipatory bail to release him in the event of his arrest in Crime No.621/2024. The Trial Court, by considering the petition and assigning reasons, allowed the said petition and granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 483(3) read with Section 482 of the BNSS seeking for cancellation of bail. The Trial Court considered the said petition and proceeded to dismiss the same on the ground that there is no violation of the bail conditions. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1 had threatened the petitioner in front of one Hanumanthappa and pursuant to the same, on 31.12.2024, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the investigation officer and upon receipt of the said complaint NCR No.514/2024 was registered. Hence, the same amounts to violation of the conditions of bail. However, the Trial Court has rightly held that mere registration of NCR No.514/2024 does not create a presumption for violation of the bail conditions. Furthermore, the learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the respondent No.1 had used the vehicle bearing No.KA-04-JF-6923 owned by the petitioner and had caused various traffic violations resulting in a fine amount of Rs.40,000/- to 45,000/-. The Trial Court also considered the said contention and noted that the respondent No.1 had admitted to the said violations, produced receipts of Rs.15,000/- for payment of fine and also gave an oral undertaking before the Court to pay the balance fine - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 amount and the same cannot be a ground to cancel the bail. The aforesaid contentions and the corresponding finding recorded by the Trial Court are after considering the facts and law in its proper perspective, which does not call for any interference. 6. It is also to be noted that the charge sheet has already been filed in Crime No.621/2024, therefore, even on this ground, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court cannot be interfered with. 7. Insofar as the contention with regard to the impact on the CIBIL score of the petitioner due to non- payment of the loan by the respondent No.1 is concerned, the same cannot be a ground for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused. The petitioner has failed to establish that the bail condition has been violated by the respondent No.1 or the grant of bail is perverse and based on irrelevant considerations. In the absence of any such - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18965 CRL.P No.6963/2025 material, the impugned order does not call for any interference. 8. The petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1