(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (U/S 483 BNSS) by the advocate for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in Cr.No.159/2025 of Thilak Park Police Station, Tumakuru, for the offences punishable under Sections/U/S 118(1), 109(1) of BNS, 2023, pending on the file of VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru.)

Oral Order

1. The petitioner, who is arraigned as sole accused, is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.159/2025 registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Brief facts of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint came to be registered by the granduncle of the victim stating that, his nephew had performed the marriage of the victim to Farman Pasha five years ago. The couple had two children. Both the petitioner herein and Muskan Banu were living in Veerasagara. There was a constant dispute between the petitioner and his wife. Panchayath was held between the couple and it was resolved. The petitioner herein was suspecting the fidelity of the victim and used to quarrel with her. On 13.12.2025, around 01.30 p.m., the complainant had received a message stating that the victim had sustained injuries at the hands of the petitioner and the petitioner had locked the door from outside and went away. Immediately, he went there, broke open the door and saw that she was lying on the floor in a pool of blood. Immediately, she was shifted to the hospital. The Doctor advised them to take her to M.S. Ramaiah Hospital. Thereafter, she was shifted to the said hospital for her treatment. Hence, the complaint. The respondent-police after conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet.

3. Heard Sri Purushothama H.E., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Anitha Girish N., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is none other than the husband of the victim. The victim used to talk on her phone unnecessarily with another person and she was warned many times that she should not talk with that person, however, she continued the same without any changes or mending her ways.

5. It is further submitted that, during the sudden provocation, an assault had taken place, even though he had no intention to commit murder of the victim. Hence, she had sustained injuries. Later, she was admitted to the hospital. After obtaining treatment, she was discharged from the hospital. She is out of danger. The petitioner is having two children and injured wife and he has to take care of them and also he has to take care of his aged parents. He is the earning member of the family. He may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions and the petitioner will abide the conditions imposed by this Court. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State vehemently submitted that the petitioner, being a husband, had assaulted mercilessly on the vital parts of the body of the victim with a weapon and caused severe bleeding injuries. She has survived on the timely intervention of the elders and well-wishers. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of committing similar offence and also there may be chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the averments made in the complaint and charge sheet, it appears from the record that the petitioner had assaulted his wife on vital parts of the body and she had sustained severe bleeding injuries. Later, she was admitted to hospital and survived due to the timely intervention of the elders. The alleged offence is neither punishable with death nor imprisonment for life. The petitioner is none other than the husband of the victim. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

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 Crime No.159/2025 of respondent-police for the offences stated supra, on executing 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 Trial Court.

          (iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

          (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

          (v) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.

          In case, if 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.