- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104566 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI KRISHNA @ KRISHNAPPA S/O. CHOUDAPPA HIREBIDARI @ VALMIKI AGE 28 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE R/O. YAKLASAPURA TQ RANEBENNUR DIST HAVERI 581115. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAY M. MALALI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH RANEBENNUR RURAL PS R/BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 483 OF BNSS, 2023 REGULAR BAIL, PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL IN RANEBENNUR RURAL PS CRIME NO.173/2025 (CC.NO.2986/2025) FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 85, 108, 80 AND 86 R/W SEC 190 OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI- SITTING AT RANEBENNUR IN SO FAR AS ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.Vijay Malali and Sri.P.N.Hatti, High Court Government Pleader, for the parties. 2. The petition is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNSS’), with the following prayer: ”Wherefore for the reasons stated above it is prayed before this Hon’ble Court that, be pleased to grant regular bail in Ranebennur Rural PS Crime No.173/2025 (CC.No.2986/2025) for the offence punishable under Section 85, 108, 80 and 86 R/w Section 190 OF BNS 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Haveri- sitting at Ranebennur in so far as Accused No.1 is concerned.” 3. The facts of the case which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under: Based on the complaint lodged by Smt.Manjavva, Ranebennur Police Station registered a case as Crime No.173 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 108, 80 and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 86 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘the BNS’) and under Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 4. After thorough investigation, the Police filed the charge sheet against the petitioner, while the remaining accused persons have been shown as absconding accused. 5. The petitioner is in custody and sought for grant of regular bail, which was turned down by the learned Trial Judge by order dated 15.10.2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.651/2025. 6. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court with the aforesaid prayer. 7. Sri.Vijay Malali, learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, vehemently contended that the petitioner is in custody since 24.06.2025, and since the charge sheet has been filed, continuation of the accused in judicial custody is no longer warranted. 8. He would further contended that there is a child of six months old, who is under the care and custody of the parents of the petitioner and therefore, petitioner is required to be enlarged on bail. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 9. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the bail grounds with vehemence by contending that the gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioner is higher side and merely on the ground that the accused is in custody since June 2025 would not be a ground for enlarging the accused on bail. 10. He would further contend that very fact that the other petitioners are absconding shows the conduct of the present petitioner also. He would also contended that the incident occurred in the house of the petitioner, in as much as the deceased hung herself in the house that too in the bedroom and the medical reports indicate that the deceased died on account of asphyxia and thus sought for dismissal of the bail petition. 11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the record meticulously. On such perusal, it is crystal clear that the unfortunate incident occurred in the house of the petitioner, after seven years of marriage. The fact of deceased dying a suicidal death by hanging is established prima facie not only by the inquest mahazar and other material documents but also from the autopsy report. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 12. The allegations in the complaint would go to show that there was a physical and mental harassment imparted to the petitioner practically every day on the ground that she does not know how to cook properly or to attend household activities. 13. Whether at all there was a harassment, which was sufficient enough to abate the committing of the suicide by the victim or not, cannot be decided by this Court at this stage by holding a mini trial, as per the settled principles of law. 14. Suffice to say that the material on record at this stage would definitely disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order granting bail by resorting to the special power vested in this Court under Section 483 of the BNSS. 15. Further, the mere fact that the accused is in custody since June 2025 would not be a sole parameter which would weigh in favour of the petitioner in a matter of this nature while seeking the grant of bail. Further, if six month old child is being rared by the parents of the petitioner, the same would be continue to be rared by them and therefore, on that ground the petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:65 CRL.P No. 104566 of 2025 16. Taking note of the gravity of the situation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are not sufficient to accept the request for grant of bail. 17. It is always open to the petitioner to approach this Court with a successive bail request if there is a positive change in circumstances. With that liberty, the following order: ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE RHR/-CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 19