IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13444 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /

482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. MR. KARTHIK. M, S/O MURUGAN, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT INDIRA GANDHI EXTENSION INDAVARA CHICKMAGALURU 577101.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. GAGANDEEP E.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BASAVANAHALLI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560001.

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARA YANA MURTHY RAJASHRI

2. SRI BALAJI, S/O UMANAYAK Location: HIGH COURT OF AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS KARNATAKA R/AT RAMANAHALLI CHIKKAMAGALAURU 577101 (REP.BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER SRI UMA NAYAK,R/W RAMANAHALLI, CHICKMAGALURU TALUK - 577101.

(R2 deleted v/c/o dated 23.10.2025)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 R2 DELETED V/C/O DATED 23.10.2025)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 (FILED UNDER SECDTION

482 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ORDER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT POLICE (BASAVANAHALLI POLICE STATION) TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL FORTH WITH IN THE EVENT OF THIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.71/2025 PENDING ADJUDICATION ON THE FILE OF LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT, WITH THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 140(1), 352, 118(1), 351(2) AND SEC.190 OF BNS 2023 IN THE ABOVE CASE TO SERVE.

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 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.71/2025 of Basavanahalli Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 352, 118(1), 351(2) and 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR. There was no enmity between the complainant and accused No.1, and there was a criminal case. He further submits that, accused Nos.1 and 2 have been granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State would contend that, there was a specific overt act against the petitioner assaulting the injured with knife, and in spite of that, his name has not been shown as accused in the FIR. The wound certificate indicates that the injured has sustained lacerated wound measuring 2x5 cms. on the right thigh. There is a serious overt act alleged against the petitioner assaulting the injured with the knife. The investigation is in progress. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

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

6. One Balaji has filed the complaint. On the basis of the complaint, case came to be registered in Crime No.71/2025 of Basavanahalli Police Station for the aforesaid offences. The said Balaji is injured in the incident, and as per the wound certificate, he has sustained lacerated wound measuring 2x5 cms. on the right thigh. On perusal of the averments in the complaint indicates that, the name of the petitioner i.e. Batani has been mentioned. He has not been arrayed as accused in the FIR.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's name is Karthik M, and he is also called as Batani. When accused Nos.1 and 2 have forcibly took the complainant in the auto to a place near a canal, where the petitioner boarded in the said auto, and he was holding a weapon, and the complainant was made to get down from the auto, and this petitioner abused him in filthy language stating that he has assaulted his younger br