2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36230
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
SRI K MALLAPPA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 14488/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14488 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /
482(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SRI K MALLAPPA S/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, LINGAYITARA BIDI, NANJANGUD TALUK, BILIGEREHOBLI CHINNAMBALLI VILLAGE MYSURU DISTRICT-571 119.
2. SMT. GURUPADAMMA W/O K.MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT NANJANAGUDU TALUK, BILIGERE HOBLI, CHINNAMBALLI MYSURU DISTRICT-571119.
Digitally signed by
3. SMT. MAMATHA LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI DHANALAKSHMI M URF MAMATHA Location: HIGH W/O CHANDRAMOULEESHA COURT OF KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
4. SRI CHANDRAMOULESHA M C S/O LATE CHINNASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, BOTH PETITIONER No.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDING AT CHUNGADIPURA ROAD, NEAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, SHANTHEMARAHALLI VILLAGE AND HOBLI CHAMARAJA NAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT-571 115.
5. SMT. M SOWMYA W/O VRUSHABENDRASWAMY M AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOLLEGALA TALUK, NO. 51, HALE HAMPAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HAMPAPURA, MULLURU CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 442.
6. VRUSHABENDRASWAMY M S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS LINGAYAT STREET HALE HAMPAPURA GRAMA MULLURU POST, MULLURU CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 442.
NOTE IN THE CRL.MISC NO.1471/25 ORDER COPY ACCUSED NO.7 NAME IS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS VRUSHABENDRA M. HENCE WE MENTIONED ACCUSED NO.7 AS PER AADHAR CARD.
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KASHINATH J D, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOWLANDE POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU -560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C (U/S
482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE PETITION ACCORDINGLY GRANT PROTECTION FROM ARREST BY WAY OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CASE OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.No.124/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT KOWLANDE POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 85,80,103,190 OF BNS, 2023, UNDER SECTION 3,4,6 OF D.P ACT, 1961, REGISTERED ON THE COMPLAINT DTD 11.09.2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM COURT, NANJANGUD, MYSORE DISTRICT.
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 petitioners -accused Nos.2 to
7 under Section 482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in respect of Crime No.124/2025 of Kowlande Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 85, 80, 103, 190 of BNS and Sections 3,4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are in laws of deceased. Petitioner Nos.3 and 5 are sisters of accused No.1 and daughters of accused Nos.2 and 3. Petitioner No.4 is husband of petitioner No.3 and petitioner No.6 is husband of petitioner No.5. Petitioner Nos.3 to 6 -accused Nos.4 to 7 were residing in Chamarajnagar and they not resided with the deceased, and accused Nos.1 to 3 were residing at Nanjangudu taluk. Except allegation of demand of dowry, there are no other allegations against petitioners. The deceased was taking treatment for her psychiatry problem from 26.02.2024 till 12.08.2025. Petitioner No.1 is aged 75 years and petitioner No.2 is aged 72 years. The investigation is almost completed. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. With these, he prays to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State would contend that the marriage of the deceased with accused No.1 has taken place on 30.06.2021. The deceased was taking treatment for a psychiatric problem during 2024-25. The petitioners are required for investigation. With this, she prayed for rejection of the petition.
5. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has perused FIR, complaint and other materials placed on recor