THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL U/S 483 OF BNSS IN CR.NO.149/2025 OF KANAKAPURA RURAL P.S., PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C. COURT, KANAKAPURA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 189(2), 191(3), 126(2), 352, 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 238, 49, 190 OF BNS, 2023.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 seeking regular bail in Crime No.149/2025 filed by respondent - Police for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 109(1), 126(2), 115(2), 189(2), 190, 49, 238, 191(3), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

Factual matrix of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the petitioner went to speak with the complainant and his brother, they were not in a position to talk properly as they had consumed alcohol. Though, P.W.1 is arrayed as an eye-witness to the incident, the fact remains that, the averments of the charge sheet would indicate that P.W.1 and his brother, on 12.10.2025 around 1.40 a.m., had been to the house of the petitioner and they created a nuisance in front of the house of the petitioner. The petitioner and his son came out of the house and caught hold C.W.1. By that time, the deceased – Sunil escaped from the place by taking his scooter and proceeding towards Ramanagar.

3. It is further stated that on instruction of the petitioner, accused Nos. 3 and 4 went to trace the deceased – Sunil. When the deceased was proceeding on his scooter near Thimmasandra Village, accused No.4 being a driver of a Thar vehicle, dashed his scooter and knocked him down. Consequently, the deceased Sunil sustained injuries and thereafter, he was brought back to the place of accused No.1 where he was assaulted again. Later, someone informed the police by calling the help-line. The police came and rescued both the injured persons. Thereafter, both were shifted to Government Hospital for treatment. However, in the medical history, accused No.1 deliberately gave the statement that the deceased – Sunil had sustained injuries due to a road accident. Later, after obtaining treatment, P.W.1 lodged a complaint before the respondent police. The respondent police registered a case, conducted investigation and submitted the charge sheet.

4. Heard Sri. S. Shankarappa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Asma Kouser, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Regarding the allegation that he assaulted P.W.1 and his brother with a sickle and caused injuries, the averments of the charge sheet indicate that the petitioner allegedly assaulted both persons on their legs. However, he had no intention to commit murder.

6. It is further submitted that the similarly placed other accused have been enlarged on bail and the petitioner stands on the same footing. He is aged about 50 years and is a permanent resident of Gendekere Village, Kanakapura Taluk. He would abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

7. Per contra, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State vehemently submitted that the complainant is an eyewitness to the incident and has sustained severe injuries. There is a serious threat to the witnesses. The manner in which the incident took place indicates its severity and gravity. Such being the case, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is a likelihood of danger to the life of the complainant and the witnesses. Hence, it is not appropriate to gra