IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 13989 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /

482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. VEERENDRA PATIL S/O NAGARAJA GOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT KALANGI, BISILAKOPPA YAKKAMBI, SIRSI TALUK UTTARA KANNADA – 581 358.

…PETITIONER Digitally signed by (BY SRI SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

LAKSHMINAR AYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Locat ion: HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARN ATAKA

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ANAVATTI POLICE, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. B PUSHPALATHA, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.PC (FILED U/S

482 BNNS) PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT/ANAVATTI POLICE STATION, TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME No.155/2025 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103(1) AND 351(2) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE V ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA (SITTING AT SAGAR).

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section

482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.155/2025 of Anavatti Police Station registered for offences under Sections 103(1) and 351(2) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional SPP for respondent/State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that only on the ground that this petitioner had threatened the deceased, a false complaint came to be filed against him of poisoning the deceased. The deceased who was alive between 29.06.2025 till 19.07.2025 has not made any allegation against the petitioner. The deceased has stated that he has been given some juice bottle by somebody else and he drank it and it might have contained poison. There is no allegation against the petitioner in the averments of the complaint that he only had given the said juice bottle to the deceased and made him to drink. The complaint has been filed only on the suspicion that this petitioner was loving the sister of the deceased and when deceased had come in his way he had threatened him. Petitioner is ready to co-operate with police in investigation and abide by terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With these he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned Additional SPP would contend that there is an allegation of poisoning by this petitioner to the deceased. Investigation is in progress. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there are chances of he hampering the investigation and tampering the prosecution witnesses. With these she prayed for dismissal of petition.

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

6. On perusal of the averments of the complaint, the allegation against this petitioner is that he was insisting the daughter of the complaint to love him and the deceased who was accompanying the said girl has come in the way of accused following the said girl and he has threatened him. The deceased was reported to be unwell by the warden of the hostel to the first informant on 29.06.2025 and he was treated in the hospital till 19.07.2025. The deceased during that period has not made any allegation against this petitioner of he giving any juice containing poison. The deceased has stated to the first informant that somebody gave him juice and he drank it. Considering the above aspect, the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged offence has to be ascertained by investigation and trial. The petitioner has undertaken to co-operate with the police in investigation and abide by terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Conside