Eshwar S/O. Hulugappa Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. (482 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.130/2025 REGISTERED BEFORE GANGAVATHI TOWN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(3), 190 OF BNS 2023, PENDING INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15054 CRL.P No. 104180 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

¶32

The petitioner/accused No.2 is before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.130/2025 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS 2023’).

¶33

Brief facts of the case:

¶34

The case of the prosecution is that, one

¶35

Hulugappa has filed a complaint stating that he has three sons and three daughters. His daughter was constructing a new building adjacent to his land. On 21.06.2025, at about 3.00 p.m., his daughter was preparing to construct a lintel for the house. On the same day, at about 7.00 p.m., when his daughter was in her house, accused No.1 came there

¶36

and picked up a quarrel with his daughter and his grandchildren and instructed them not to construct the lintel of the house and he alleges that it may cause obstruction of

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:15054 CRL.P No. 104180 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

air and light. At that time, his sons Lingaraj and Sanna Amaresh came there and questioned the same, for which the accused Huligesh slapped Lingaraj by holding his shirt collar. When the complainant and his grandchildren went to pacify the incident, the accused Karadi Hulugappa and his sons by name Eshwar and Manjunath have assaulted them and pushed them on the ground. The accused No.2 had assaulted Lingaraj on the head with size stone with an intention to commit murder. As a result of which, Lingaraj sustained a bleeding injury and he became unconscious. Thereafter, he was shifted to Gangavathi hospital for treatment. On the basis of the said incident, the respondent police registered a case for the offences stated supra .

¶40

Heard Sri. B C Jnanayyaswami, learned counsel

¶41

for the petitioner and Sri. Praveen Y. Devareddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State.

¶42

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. There may be chances of his arrest in Crime

¶43

5 -

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15054 CRL.P No. 104180 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

No.130/2025. The injuries sustained by the petitioner are not sufficient to invoke the ingredients of Section 109 of BNS 2023.

¶47

It is further submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of the address stated in the cause title and he will attend the court regularly. Moreover, the petitioner is having deep root in the society and he is aged about 25 years and working as a coolie.

¶48

It is further submitted that the entire family is depending on his income. The alleged injuries stated to have been sustained by the injured are not serious in nature. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by granting anticipatory bail. The petitioner will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶49

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State vehemently submitted that, the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2. It is stated in

¶50

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:15054 CRL.P No. 104180 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

the charge-sheet that he has dropped size stone on the head of the injured with an intention to commit his murder. The manner in which he has committed the offence would indicate the intention of the petitioner. As the petitioner has dropped the size stone on the vital part of the body knowingly that there may be a chances of causing death, he is not entitled for the relief as prayed for. Therefore, the petition has to be rejected.

¶53

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. On perusal of the averments of the complaint, it appears that, accused No.2 is stated to have assaulted on the head of Lingaraj with size stone. As a result of which, the said Lingaraj sustained bleeding injury and he was shifted to the hospital for treatment. The manner in which the petitioner had assaulted the injured prima-facie would indicate that it is not appropriate to grant him bail.

¶54