Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH SHO / PSI MUDBI PS., TQ. BASAVAKALYAN, REP. BY THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI-585102.

¶17

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 483 OF BNSS,2023 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS BAIL PETITION AND THEREBY ORDER THE RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN MUDBI PS. CRIME NO. 95/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC., COURT BASAVA KALYAN HUMNABAD FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 110, 118(2), 352 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023.

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1467 CRL.P No. 200339 of 2025

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

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

¶24

This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to release him on bail in Crime No.95/2024 for the offences under Sections 110, 118(2), 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita(BNS), 2023.

¶25

It is the case of the prosecution that the jurisdictional police have received an information from the complainant while he was taking treatment at Government hospital, Mudbi. The said information which reveals that, on 24.12.2024 around 3.45 p.m., when the informant was standing in front of the Hanuman temple, the petitioner being a friend of the complainant, asked him to pay Rs.10/-. When he refused to pay the said amount, the petitioner stated to have assaulted with knife and caused injuries. In the meantime, the injured was rescued by intervention of his relatives and he was shifted to the

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1467 CRL.P No. 200339 of 2025

¶27

hospital for treatment. Based on the said information the respondent-police have registered the case against the petitioner for the offences stated supra.

¶28

Heard Sri R.S.Lagali, learned counsel for the

¶29

petitioner and Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.

¶30

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. Though the alleged incident said to have taken place for petty reasons, the fact remains that both the complaint and petitioner were friends. The incident has taken place at a spur of moment without any premeditation. In fact, the petitioner had no intention to cause of any injury to the complainant.

¶31

It is further submitted that the alleged offences are neither punishable with death nor imprisonment for life. Though there are allegations made out against the petitioner that he had assaulted with knife, the

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1467 CRL.P No. 200339 of 2025

¶33

complainant has been discharged from the hospital after obtaining the treatment.

¶34

It is further submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Mangaloor village, Basavakalyan Taluk, and he was working as bike mechanic and he is earning member of the family and he 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.

¶35

Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently, opposed the said petition and he further submitted that the petitioner had intention to commit murder of the complainant, therefore, he deliberately asked his friend for Rs.10/-, when he refused to give the amount, he assaulted with knife and caused the injuries. The said injuries had been caused on the vital parts of the body. Therefore, the ingredients of the provisions stated supra are squarely applicable. Making such submissions, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶36

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1467 CRL.P No. 200339 of 2025

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the findings of averments of the complaint, the petitioner and complainant were friends and both were known to each other. When the petitioner was refused for the amount off Rs.10/-, he stated to have assaulted the injured with knife.

¶38

The averments of the compliant would indicate that the petitioner had used the knife to cause injuries would indicate that he had intention to cause injuries. However, the incident had occurred at a spur of moment as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶39