IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5530 OF 2026 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS))

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.

Digitally signed by 3. V.J.MAHALAKSHMI, HEMALATHA C/O JAYARAMAN, J AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, Location:

R/AT NO.2 AMMAN NAGAR, HIGH COURT OF NEAR VASANTHAM NAGAR, 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, BENGALURU 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 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAJATH SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 08.04.2026)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2026 PASSED BY THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C COURT NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT (THE "LD.TRIAL COURT" HEREINAFTER) IN RESPECT OF CR.NO.342/2025 REGISTERED BY NELAMANGALAL RURAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-

A2 AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners were accused in Crime No.342/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth referred to as 'BNS'). The petitioners sought anticipatory bail, which was granted in Crl.Misc.No.2115/2025. This was however subject to furnishing solvent sureties. The petitioners failed to furnish the surety, following which an application was filed by the de facto complainant for cancellation of the order granting anticipatory bail. The trial Court in terms of an order dated 26.03.2026 held, "The anticipatory bail was granted by the District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District in Karnataka and had not insisted the petitioners furnish sureties of Tamil Nadu, who have solvency certificate." Consequently, it allowed the application to cancel the order dated 02.12.2025 granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners approached this Court in Crl.P.No.4411/2026.

2. (i) This Court after considering the contention of the petitioners that in the state of Tamil Nadu a government order is issued revoking the policy of granting solvency certificates. This Court in terms of the order dated 18.03.2026 granted an opportunity to the petitioners to furnish surety, either local or from any person in Tamil Nadu who has a solvency certificate from the concerned revenue authority to the satisfaction of the trial Court for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.

(ii) The petitioners then approached the trial Court with a surety, who had a solvency certificate from Karnataka Bank and Canara Bank. The said application was rejected by the trial Court in view of the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.4411/2026, which stated that the petitioners may furnish a surety who has a solvency certificate from the concerned revenue authority in Tamil Nadu. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners are before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the earlier policy in the state of Tamil Nadu of issuing solvency certificates by the revenue officers is revoked and therefore, the petitioners cannot furnish surety who has a solvency certificate from the revenue authority. He further contends that the petit