logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 105 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Karnataka
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 17208 Of 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS))
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Parties : M.S. Shree Rama @ M.S. Srirama Versus State Of Karnataka, Rep. By The Learned State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Nandish Patil, Advocate. For the Respondent: Harish Ganapathy, HCGP.
Date of Judgment : 03-02-2026
Head Note :-
Criminal Procedure Code - Section 438 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC 6128,
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This Crl.P is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. (filed under Section 482 of BNSS) praying to Grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.217/2025 registered by Channarayapatna Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 352, 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the file of Addl. City Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC Court, Channarayapatna, Hassan.)

Oral Order

1. This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section 482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No. 217/2025 of Channarayapatna Rural Police Station registered for offence under Sections 352, 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent - State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the petitioner and the injured - complainant are brothers. There was a civil dispute with regard to property. Petitioner had filed a suit for declaration and injunction in O.S. No. 699/2018. Thereafter it was settled and registered partition deed was executed between the parties and suit was withdrawn on 19.09.2020. Thereafter, the complainant and two others started interfering with the possession of the petitioner over his property and therefore petitioner filed suit in O.S. No. 952/2024 against the injured and two others. In the said suit, the Court had granted ex-parte order of temporary injunction, restraining the complainant and two others from interfering with the harvesting of the corn crops grown in the suit schedule property and taking the harvesting machine to the field. The injured has been discharged from the hospital and he is out of danger. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Petitioner is ready to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra learned HCGP would contend that the wound certificate of the injured - complainant indicate that he had sustained five injuries and out of them one injury is grievous in nature. The injured was admitted in the hospital for 7 days. The assault is with the machete. Investigation is in progress. Petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

6. Petitioner and the injured - complainant are brothers. There was a civil dispute between petitioner and the injured. Earlier, said dispute had been settled by way of registered partition deed in the year 2020. Thereafter the petitioner had filed suit against the injured and two others in O.S. No. 952/2024 and in the said case an ex- parte temporary injunction had been granted in favour of the petitioner restraining the injured and two others from interfering with the harvesting of the corn crop grown in the scheduled property. There is an allegation that this petitioner has assaulted the injured with machete. Out of the five injuries sustained, one is stated to be grievous in nature. The injured is now discharged from the hospital and he is out of danger. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Petitioner has undertaken to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court.

7. Considering the above aspects, petitioner has made out case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions.

In the result, the following;

ORDER

          Petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest Crime No. 217/2025 of Channarayapatna Police Station subject to following conditions:

          I. Petitioner shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from this day and execute bail bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

          II. Petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called for.

          III. Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to Police Officer or tamper with evidence.

          IV. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on first and third Sunday of every month for a period of 2 months between 10.00 a.m. and 02.00 p.m. or till filing of the final report whichever is earlier.

          V. Petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted, in case of filing of the chargesheet against him.
 
  CDJLawJournal