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. 10494 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

VINOD KUMAR G.S S/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS WORKING IN FACTORY R/AT GUNDLAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PUNITH C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA KUNIGAL POLICE STATION MURTHY RAJASHRI TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101 Location: HIGH COURT OF REPRESENTED BY SPP KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNNS) PRAYING TO PASS THE ORDER GRANT HIM BAIL IN CR NO.302/2025 OF KUNIGAL POLICE STATION, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT NOW PENDING ON THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUNIGAL FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS

281 AND 105 OF BNS OF 2023.

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 Crime No.302/2025 of Kunigal Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 281 and 105 of BNS.

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 allegation against the petitioner is that he drove the vehicle on the wrong side in one way and caused the accident and as a result there is death of 4 persons. There was no any intention on the part of the petitioner to cause the death. At the most, the petitioner is guilty of driving his vehicle in rash and negligent manner attracting offence under Section 106 of BNS which is provided with punishment of imprisonment for 02 years. Now investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Dhanush K.P Vs State in Criminal Petition No.12659/2024 wherein it is held as under “7. The material on record would go to show that the allegation against the petitioner is that he was driving the car after consuming alcohol, and therefore, the offence punishable under Section 105 of BNS, 2023, is invoked in the present case against the petitioner. The question whether the act committed by the petitioner would amount to culpable homicide within the meaning of Section 100 of BNS, 2023, is required to thrashed out in a full-fledged trial. The question whether the act committed by the petitioner would amount to an offence within the meaning of Section 105 or Section 106 of BNS, 2023, is also required to be considered by the Trial Court on the basis of the material placed before it.

8. In the case of STATE THROUGH PS LODHI COLONY, NEW DELHI VS SANJEEV NANDA - (2012)8 SCC 450, wherein the accused was driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and in the road traffic accident that had taken place, six people had died, the Hon'ble Supreme Court having altered the charge from Section 304A IPC to Section 304 Part-II of IPC, had however, refused to enhance the sentence of two years imprisonment imposed on the convicted accused, but had further directed him to do community service for a period of two years and also pay fine.”

On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State would contend that the petitioner drove his vehicle in one way on opposite side and caused the accident. As result there is death of 4 persons. The petitioner is also found having consumed the alcohol to the extent of 258.01 mg/100 ml of blood. The charge sheet materials indicate prima facie case against the petitioner for