IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4411 OF 2026 BETWEEN:

1. JAYARAMAN RENGIAH C/O RANGAIYA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.2, NEAR AMMAN NAGAR, VASANTHAM NAGAR, KARATTUMEDU, SARAVANAMPATTI, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU - 641 035.

2. MUTHUSAMY T.

S/O THANGAVELU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.44, SRI MURUGAN NAGAR, CHERAN MAANAGAR BACKSIDE, COIMBATORE SOUTH, TAMILNADU - 641048.

3. V.J.MAHALAKSHMI, Digitally C/O JAYARAMAN, signed by SUMA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, Location: R/AT NO.2, AMMAN NAGAR, HIGH NEAR VASANTHAM NAGAR, COURT OF KARNATAKA KARATTUMEDU, SARAVANAMPATTI, VTC: SARAVANAMPATTI, PO: SARAVANAMPATTI, DISTRICT: COIMBATORE, STATE: TAMILNADU PIN CODE-641 035.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PAVAN A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION REP.BY. SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALORE-560001

2. DR. V. VIJAYARAGHAVAN S/O R. VISHWANATHAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, DOOR NO.1568, KIRAN NILAYA, NEAR POST OFFICE, INDIRA NAGARA, NELAMANGALA TOWN, BENGALURU DISTRICT-562123.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2026 PASSED BY THE LD. VI ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.323/2026 IN CR.NO.342/2025 DATED 22.09.2025 REGISTERED BY NELAMANGALA RURAL P.S., PENDING BEFORE LD. PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC COURT, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners have challenged the order dated

26.02.2026 passed by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District in Crl.Misc. No.323/2026.

2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the respondent No.2 had initiated prosecution of the petitioners in Crime No.342/2025 for offences punishable under Section 308(2) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS

2023'). The petitioners had sought for anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.2115/2025 which was granted on 02.12.2025 subject to certain conditions. One of which was that the petitioners should furnish solvent surety. The petitioners failed to furnish surety, following which an application was filed by the defacto complainant for cancellation of the order granting anticipatory bail. The trial Court in terms of the impugned order held that "the anticipatory bail was granted by the District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District in Karnataka and had not insisted the petitioners to furnish sureties of Tamil Nadu who have solvency certificate". Consequently, it allowed the petition and cancelled the order dated 02.12.2025. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners are before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that petitioners do not have any acquaintance in Karnataka and that the State of Tamil Nadu has issued a notification doing away with the procedure for providing a solvency certificate. He therefore submits that the petitioners be permitted to furnish cash surety or such other surety to the satisfaction of the Court. He submits that an application was filed by the petitioners before the Court for modification of the condition to furnish surety and that the said application was not considered by the trial Court before the impugned order canceling the order granting anticipatory bail. He therefore prays that the impugned order be set aside and an opportunity be granted to the petitioners to furnish surety.

4. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.1 submits that the order passed by the District Court is just and proper as the petitioners had failed to comply with the conditions. He therefore submits that there is no need to interfere with the impugned order and if petitioners desire, they may approach the