IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17668 OF 2025

(438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SACHIN H.D.

S/O. DAKAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

R/AT, HULISARA VILLAGE,

SHANKARAPURA,

ARALASURALI POST,

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577414.

2. POOJA H.D.

D/O. DAKAPPA GOWDA,

W/O. SANDESH K.S.

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

R/AT, HULISARA VILLAGE,

SHANKARAPURA,

Digitally signed by

LAKSHMINARAYANA ARALASURALI POST,

MURTHY RAJA SHRI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,

Location: HIGH

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT 577414

COURT OF

KARNATAKA ALSO AT

NO.2267, 22^ND CROSS,

BANASHANKARI II STAGE,

BANGALORE - 560 070.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR PRAKASH.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THIRTHAHALLI POLICE, NOW REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

…RESPONDENT (BY Smt.WAHEEDA M M, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE THEM ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.331/2025 OF THIRTAHALLI POLICE REGISTERED FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 108 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF BNS 2023 NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS COURT, THIRTHAHALLI.

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 accused Nos.1 and 3 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.331/2025 of Thirthahalli Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that, the deceased committed suicide on account of a notice issued by the Chit Fund Company (accused No.4), which was insisting upon repayment of the loan amount. The allegation against petitioner No.1 is that, he had borrowed a loan from the said Chit Fund, for which the deceased stood as a guarantor and pledged his property title deeds. The allegation against petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is that, when contacted by the deceased over the phone, he refused to repay the loan amount and told the deceased to go and die. The said act of the petitioner No.1 does not amount to abetment to commit suicide. The deceased is stated to have left a death note, but that does not contain the signature of the deceased, who used to sign in English.

4. The petitioner No.2/accused No.3 is a lady working in Bangalore, and she is sister of the accused No.1, and she is pregnant of thirteen week. The petitioners are ready to cooperate with the police in the investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court.

With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State would contend that, the death note itself clearly indicates that, the petitioners are responsible for the suicide of the deceased. The acts of the petitioners abetted the deceased to commit suicide. The petitioners are required for custodial interrogation. With this, she prayed to reject the petition.

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

7. The petitioner No.1/accused No.1 had borrowed loan from Kodachadri Chit Fund (accused No.4), for which, the deceased stood as a surety, and he had pledged his property title deeds. The said Kodachadri Chit Fund Company (accused No.4) had issued a notice to the deceased to pay the loan amount of accused No.1. The deceased and his wife insisted the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 to pay the amount borrowed from the Chit Company, and he refused to repay the loan amount, and asked the deceased to go and d