IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17550 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SHRI. SIDDARAM @ SIDDAPPA S/O DEVENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT BHIMANAHALLI CHITTAPURA TALUK GULBARGA DISTRICT

2. HONAPPA S/O LATE MALAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS DARKAS PETTE, CHITHAPURA TALUK GULBARGA DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SOMEGOWDA A.N, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI AND:

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION HOSAKOTE SUB DIVISION BENGALURU DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2/ ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ON BAIL IN CR.NO.308/2025 DATED 14.11.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT/HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103 R/W SEC.3(5) OF THE BNS, 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND CJM COURT, HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL 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 accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.308/2025 of Hosakote Police Station, registered for offences under Section 103 read with 3(5) of BNS.

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

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the alleged incident has taken place when the petitioners and deceased were consuming alcohol. The deceased was insisting the petitioners to get him alcohol. But the deceased had already drunk and he was under intoxication and at that time there was a quarrel between the deceased and the petitioners. The petitioners alleged to have assaulted the deceased with hands. As a result, the deceased died. The petitioners have not used any weapon to assault the deceased. The incident has taken place in a sudden quarrel. There was no any intention on the part of the petitioners to kill the deceased. The offence under Section 103(1) of BNS is not attracted and at the most, the case comes under Exception 4 of Section 101 of BNS. Even the statement of CW.2, eyewitness has been recorded, who has stated the assault by the petitioners with hands to the deceased. The name of the eyewitness is also stated in the complaint. But the statement of the eyewitness has been recorded on 04.12.2025 even though the incident has taken place on 13.11.2025. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned Additional SPP would contend that the incident has been witnessed by CW.2. CW.2 has specifically stated regarding petitioners assaulting the deceased on his neck, head and cheek with hands several times. The Doctor who conducted PM examination over the dead body of the deceased has opined that death is due to cervical cord injuries sustained. The assault is on the neck and there is injury to cervical cord as the petitioners have assaulted the deceased on his neck. The charge sheet material show prima-facie case against the petitioners for offences alleged against them. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

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

6. As per the charge sheet the case of the prosecution is that on 13.11.2025 at about 10.00 p.m. when petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were consuming alcohol in front of Srinivas Wine Stores, at that time, the deceased came there and asked them to get him