- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17433 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: DEVARAJU B P, S/O PANDURANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT BANDAKUNTE VILLAGE, GOWDAGERE HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT. PIN 3 572 137 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.N. RADHA KRISHNA., ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY T. NARASAPURA POLICE Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001. &RESPONDENT (BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISHA N., HCGP) --- THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO DIRECT THE T.NARASIPURA POLICE IN THE EVENT OF PETITIONER BEING ARRESTED IN CRIME NO.358/2025 FOR OFFENES P/U/S 108 OF BNS 2023 NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM T.NARASIPURA, HE MAY BE ENLARGED ON BAIL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, who is the sole accused, is before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.358/2025 of respondent-police for the offence under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that the mother of the deceased lodged a complaint stating that the deceased Nagarathna alias Shruthi was her only daughter. She had performed the marriage of her daughter with Raju A.R., who is the resident of Aralikatte Village, Chamarajanagara taluk. The couple had two children. Her daughter, namely, Nagarathna alias Shruthi, was residing along with the complainant for the past eight months. The son-in-law and children had been to Aralikatte for festival. However, the complainant and her daughter Shruthi were residing in the house. On 21.10.2025, around 09.00 p.m., the complainant and her daughter were sleeping in the first floor and they were talking with each other. In the meantime, she was informed that the present petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 got acquainted with the deceased Shruthi through Facebook and he was talking with her through video call and he was harassing her in one or the other pretext. 3. It is further stated that the petitioner was insisting the said Shruthi not to go along with her husband anyway. Further, he insisted her to pay money for the purpose of not disclosing the conversation to her husband. Accordingly, it is stated that Rs.4,50,000/- was paid by the said Shruthi, on pledging her gold ornaments. On the following day, on 22.10.2025 around 07.00 a.m., the said Shruthi had asked the complainant to give coffee. The complainant came to the ground floor to prepare coffee and went back along with coffee to the first floor. However, in the meantime, the door was closed. She opened the window and saw that her daughter Shruthi was hanging. Immediately, she raised hue and cry and invited the neighbours and with the help of the neighbours, they shifted the said Shruthi to the hospital for examination. However, it has been declared as brought dead. Hence the complaint. The respondent 3 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 Police after registering the case, conducting the investigation. 4. Heard Sri A.N. Radhakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Anitha Girisha N., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent 3 State. 5. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, the said Shruthi was insisting the petitioner to talk with her and she used to send the messages often and she was informing the petitioner that she was being harassed and tortured by her husband. Many such messages have been sent by her to the petitioner and he was advising her properly through the messages. In fact, the petitioner is the permanent resident of Gowdagere, Sira Taluk, Tumkur District, however, Shruthi is the permanent resident of T.Narasipura Taluk. Though it is alleged that, he had instigated her to commit suicide, the fact remains that there are no messages sent on the alleged date of incident to instigate the deceased Shruthi - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 to commit suicide. The petitioner is the permanent resident of Gowdagere Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumkur District. He will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent 3 State vehemently submitted that offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature and heinous also. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it gives a wrong message to the Society at large. In fact, he has instigated the woman having two children to commit suicide by way of giving torture. Therefore, a detailed investigation is necessary. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of absconding from the case. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 it appears from the record that, the petitioner and the deceased were acquainted with each other through Facebook and they were exchanging the messages and were talking over phone on several occasions. The learned counsel for the petitioner made available some of the chats which had taken place between the petitioner and the deceased. On reading of the said chats/messages, it appears that, on the date of the alleged incident, she had been subjected to torture, not by the petitioner, but for some other reasons, by her husband. Having considered the facts and circumstances and without adverting to the merit of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case to grant him the relief as prayed for. 8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest, in Crime No.358/2025 of respondent-police for the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14193 CRL.P No. 17433 of 2025 offence stated supra, on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one month from today, to execute a personal bond and also to furnish surety. (iv) The petitioner shall co-operate with investigation as and when required. (v) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal cases till disposal of the case. In case the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE Bss List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28