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. 11224 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN: 1. IMRAN

S/O. SAMIULLA KHAN

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

R/AT No. 381, 1^ST MAIN, 3^RD CROSS

GANGONDANAHALLI

BENGALURU CITY.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI MANJUNATHA A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

SHO, CHANDRA LAYOUT PS

BENGALURU – 560 040

Digitally signed by

LAKSHMINARA YANA REPTD.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

MURTHY RAJASHRI

HIGH COURT BUILDING

Location: HIGH

COURT OF BENGALURU - 560 001.

KARNATAKA

2. ZAMEER ULLA KHAN, S/O. SHABIR ULLA KHAN

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

R/AT: No. 250, 5^TH CROSS

NEAR HAJMIR AGENCY

GANGONDANAHALLI

BENGALURU CITY – 560 013.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1 SRI SHAIK BABU S, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN S.C.No.304/2025 OF CR.No.576/2024 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1) OF BNS ACT, 2023, REGISTERED BY CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE, BENGALURU CITY.

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 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in S.C.No.304/2025 (Crime No. 576/2024 of Chandra Layout Police Station) registered for offence under Section 103(1) of BNS, pending on the file of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, (CCH No.72), Bengaluru.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned HCGP for Respondent No.1/State and learned counsel for Respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that deceased was having some relationship with another person. There was a quarrel and therefore, she consumed alcohol and committed suicide. The petitioner was not present in the house at the time of the incident. CW.2 who is the child of the petitioner and the deceased was in the house of his grandparents. The Doctor who conducted PM examination over the body of the deceased has opined that death is due to asphyxia as a result of ligature strangulation and at the time of death the deceased had consumed ethanol alcohol. The PM report does not indicate any external injuries over the dead body of the deceased. The charge sheet does not contain any material against the petitioner for having committed the offence alleged against him. With this he prayed to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent/State would contend that the death has taken place in the house of the petitioner in the night hours. After the incident, petitioner took CW.2, his son and went out of the house. The petitioner himself surrendered and at that time the child was with him and child was given to the uncle of the petitioner. The charge sheet materials show prima-facie case against the petitioner. The PM report indicates that the cause of death is due to asphyxia as a result of ligature strangulation. With this he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the trial Court considering the merits of the case has rightly rejected the bail application of the petitioner. The petitioner has not been produced before the trial Court for commencement of the trial. If the petitioner is granted bail, he will not be available for trial and he will flee from justice. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

6. Having heard the counsels, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

7. As per charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the petitioner with the deceased has taken place on 22.08.2019 and out of marriage a son was born and he is aged 4 years at the time of the incident. The petitioner used to suspect the fidelity of the deceased and used to quarrel and assault her and therefore, the deceased went to her parents house. The elders secured the petitioner and advised him and thereafter sent the