- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 93 OF 2025 (439(2)(Cr.PC) / 483(3)(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 44 OF 2025 IN CRL.P No. 93/2025 BETWEEN: SRI PRABHAKAR S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT KADIVANAKATTE, VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 577 527 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. KEMPE GOWDA C M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SRINIVASAMURTHY R S/O G RAMAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 191/2 BEHIND NES OFFICE, KANNIKA NILAYA, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577 527 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HOSADURGA POLICE STATION, Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, HIGH COURT OF KARANTAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V SATEESHCHANDRA., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. RANGASWAMY.R, HCGP FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.P.C (U/S 483(3) BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ODER OF GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL BY THE 1st ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITHRADURGA, BY CANCELLING THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN CRL.MISC.NO.711/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE 1st ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA DTD 13.06.2024 AND COMMIT HIM TO CUSTODY, PENDING DISPOSAL OF SC.NO.135/2024, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 2nd ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA. IN CRL.P NO. 44/2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI PRABHAKAR S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT KADIVANAKATTE, VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577 527 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. KEMPE GOWDA C M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT VEEDAVATHI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 W/O DHANANJAYA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT, KADIVANAKATTE VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577 527 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HOSADURGA POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY.R, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.P.C (U/S 483(3) BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL BY THE 1st ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA, BY CANCELLING THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN CRL.MISC.NO.733/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE 1st ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA DTD 19.06.2024 AND COMMIT HER TO CUSTODY, PENDING DISPOSAL OF SC.NO.135/2024, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 2nd ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER These petitions are filed by the petitioner who is the informant. In the case of the petitioner, he was the complainant - witness No.1 in CC.No.334/2024 before the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Hosodurga, Chitradurga District. According to the petitioner, a written complaint was lodged on 26.02.2004 with respondent No.2 - Police and registered in Crime No.72/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 323, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code against 10 persons. 2. It is also the case of the petitioner that, injured Keshavappa, subsequently died while undergoing treatment and the offence under Section 302 and 114 IPC was added thereafter. Subsequent to the investigation, a charge sheet has been laid against 12 persons including respondent No.1 - accused Nos.11 and 12 before the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Hosadurga, Chitradurga District. The matter was committed to the Sessions Judge and the same is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 pending in SC.No.135/2024 on the file of II Additional Civil District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga. 3. This being the state of affairs, pursuant to the investigation being completed, respondent No.1 - accused Nos.11 and 12 have approached the I Additional District and Session Judge, Chithudurga for pre-arrest anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.Nos.733/2024 and 711/2024, which were allowed vide orders dated 19.06.2024 and 13.06.2024 respectively by imposing certain conditions. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the imposing of conditions by the learned Sessions Judge while granting the anticipatory bail respondent No.1 was involved in a case under Section 126 of the BNSS, 2023 proceedings before the Taluk Magistrate / Tahasildar, Hosadurga. Therefore, it is a vehement contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.1 has violated the terms and conditions stipulated while granting the anticipatory bail. Therefore, he is in breach and violation of the conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail. Hence, it is his vehement contention that respondent No.1 has no respect for the law and does not - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 want to abide by the terms and conditions imposed while granting the bail and has willfully disobeyed the conditions imposed by the sessions judge while granting the anticipatory bail. It is also contended that respondent No.1 has taken law into their hands and are interfering with the peaceful trial and prosecution and they have approached the Court to cut short the method by putting threat to the witnesses. Hence, the present petition seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted in favour of respondent No.1. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.2 contends that there is no such breach or violation of the terms and conditions of the grant of the anticipatory bail by the learned Session Judge. So also, he contends that the terms and conditions stipulated in the anticipatory bail have been scrupulously followed. Three cases are registered against respondent No.1 and the same is pending pursuant to filing of the charge sheet. It is also contented that the terms and conditions stipulated in the anticipatory bail order passed by the Sessions Judge with regard to tampering of the prosecution witness and destroying the evidence collected by the prosecution is not interfered or violated. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 - accused Nos.11 and 12 before the Trial Court contends that the petition is frivolous and does not merit consideration for the reason that the conditions imposed while granting the anticipatory bail have not been violated or breached and it is neither the case of the petitioner that the prosecution witnesses are threatened nor any evidence collected by the prosecution have been destroyed by respondent No.1. Therefore, the only ground sought by the petitioner for cancellation of the bail is that there is another case registered against respondent No.1 under 126 of BNSS, therefore he seeks cancellation of the bail as against respondent No.1. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.1 as well as learned HCGP for respondent No.2. 8. Respondent No.1 - accused Nos.11 and 12 were granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C vide orders dated 19.06.2024 and 13.06.2024 in Crl.Misc.Nos.733/2024 and 711/2024 respectively. While granting the anticipatory bail, the learned Sessions Judge imposed three conditions namely: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 i. The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witness and shall not make any efforts to destroy the evidence to be collected by the prosecution. ii. The petitioner and his surety shall furnish their sufficient address proof before the IO/concern Court. iii. In case of violation of the conditions, the respondent is at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. 9. Having perused these conditions and the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I do not find that any good ground or cogent reason is made out by the petitioner - complainant for cancellation of the bail, as there is no violation or breach of the terms and conditions imposed of the anticipatory bail order. No material is produced, no document is placed on record to state that there is a tampering of the prosecution witness or destroying of the evidence collected by the prosecution. 10. It is also submitted that, the present stage of the case is that charge sheet is filed and the case is listed for hearing before charge. Under such circumstances, no case is made out by the petitioner for respondent No.1 having violated - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18549 CRL.P No. 93 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 44 of 2025 the terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail order passed by the learned Sessions judge. 11. While seeking cancellation of the bail it becomes the duty of the petitioner - complainant to place sufficient cogent material or reasons to show that there is willful default, breach and violation of the terms and conditions of the grant of anticipatory bail which is not divulged or shown in these cases and there is no merit in the petitions filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER The petitions are dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to place any such material of any tampering of the witnesses and destroying the prosecution evidence collected, thereby violating the terms and conditions of the bail order, if any, by placing such material before the Court. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE PNV - List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1