- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 349 OF 2026 BETWEEN: ASHWINI R W/O ANADA. M AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT HEALTH QUARTERS PANDAVAPURA TOWN, P. ADD SHAMBUNAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA-571434 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH B.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHARATH J.M., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU - 560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE HIM ON BAIL, WHO IS ACCUSED NO.2 IN CRIME NO.102/2024 (S.C.NO.5061/2024) ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION, NOW PENDING ON III ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MANDYA SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATNA FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 312, 313, 315, 316, 34 OF IPC AND SEC.19 OF KARANTAKA PRIVATE MEDICAL Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 ESTABLISHMENT ACT AND SEC.4 OF THE MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ACT 1971 IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONERS. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.102/2024 of Pandavapura Police Station, pending in SC.No.5061/2024 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mandya sitting at Srirangapatna, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 312, 313, 315, 316 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Section 19 of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act, and Section 4 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Dr. Bettaswami. 2. Heard Sri. Manjunath B.R., learned counsel for Sri.Sharath J.M., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rangaswamy. R, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -State. Perused the materials on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?” My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 4. The petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.1 was apprehended on 06.05.2024, and since then she is in judicial custody. Initially the First Information Report came to be registered against accused Nos.1 to 5. During investigation, several others were apprehended and it is stated that the charge sheet came to be filed against accused Nos. 1 to 13. Accused No.1 is said to be the kingpin, who was working as 'D' group employee at the District Hospital, Mandya and was staying in the Government quarters. Taking advantage of her acquaintance with the District Hospital, she in collusion with other accused, used to collect information about pregnant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 women, get them scanned through the co-accused and used to get them to her house i.e., Government quarters, and used to conduct termination of pregnancy illegally with the assistance of accused No.12. The charge sheet also discloses that accused No.1 was giving instructions to accused No.12 to conduct termination of pregnancy even in complicated cases. Therefore, it is clear that it was accused Nos. 1 and 12 who were actually conducting termination of pregnancy illegally and they were playing with the lives of innocent pregnant women. It is brought to the notice of the Court that many of such termination of pregnancies were conducted by accused Nos. 1 and 12. Several medicines were recovered from the house of accused No.1. 5. It is brought to the notice of the Court that, accused No.12 against whom similar and serious allegations are made is already enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2025 passed in Crl.P.11087/2025. It is stated that except accused No.6, against whom totally different allegations are made, all other accused, except the present petitioner, are enlarged on bail. Now the matter is pending for framing of charge before the Trial Court. The allegations made in the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 charge sheet discloses that, similar overt acts an are alleged against by accused No.12. Even though, this petitioner is a kingpin, and illegal act of termination of pregnancy was in the house of this petitioner, which is a Government quarters and she is answerable for such acts, the fact remains that, since the investigation is completed and the charge sheet is also filed, all co-accused except the current petitioner and accused No.6 are already enlarged on bail. Therefore, the detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to infringement to her right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution. 6. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'affirmative' and proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner - accused No.1 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.102/2024 of Pandavapura Police - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 Station, pending in SC.No.5061/2024 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mandya sitting at Srirangapatna, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 312, 313, 315, 316 and read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 19 of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act, and Section 4 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall not commit similar offences. b) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c) The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required. If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail. On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4339 CRL.P No. 349 of 2026 the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3