Sri Prakash S/O Choudappa Hirebidari Alias Valmiki Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN RANEBENNUR RURAL PS CRIME NO. 173/2025 (CC.NO.2986/2025) FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 85, 108, 80 AND 86 R/W SEC 190 OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI- SITTING AT RANEBENNUR IN SO FAR AS ACCUSED NO.2 TO 5 ARE CONCERNED.

¶28

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

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

¶31

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Vijay Malali and learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.P.N.Hatti, for the parties.

¶32

The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for ‘the BNSS’), with the following prayer:

¶33

“Wherefore for the reasons stated above it is prayed before this Hon’ble Court that, be pleased to grant anticipatory bail in Ranebennur Rural PS Crime

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC-D:64 CRL.P No. 104565 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

No.173/2025 (CC.NO.2986/2025) for the offence punishable under Section 85, 108, 80 AND 86 R/W Sec 190 of BNS 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act pending on the file of II Addl District and Sessions Judge, Haveri-sitting at Ranebennur in so far as Accused No.2 to 5 are concerned.”

¶38

Petitioners in this petition are the accused No.2 to 5 in respect of Crime No.173 of 2025.

¶39

Admittedly, the petitioners have been shown as absconding accused persons in the charge sheet filed by the Ranebennur Police.

¶40

Attempt made by the petitioners to obtain an order of grant of anticipatory bail is turned down by the learned Additional District Judge, Haveri, sitting at Ranebennur in Criminal Miscellaneous No.655 of 2025. Thereafter, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶41

Sri.Vijay Malali learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the petition vehemently contented that petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are no way connected with the incident, as petitioner No.4 was residing at her husband’s place because she is married and petitioner No.5 is a neighbor of

¶42

4 -

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC-D:64 CRL.P No. 104565 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

the deceased. Therefore, at least insofar as they are concerned, they may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶46

He would also contend that other petitioners are no way connected with the incident and unnecessarily they have been implicated in the case on the ground that the deceased hung herself in the house of the first accused and therefore, sought for grant of anticipatory bail

¶47

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the bail grounds.

¶48

Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal of material on record, it is crystal clear that the petitioners have been shown as absconding accused.

¶49

In other words, they are not been law-abiding citizens so as to seek for grant of anticipatory bail, following the settled principles of law on the subject matter.

¶50

It is always open for the petitioners to surrender before the Trial Magistrate and seek the necessary order of grant of bail. If any such application is filed by the petitioners after they surrender, the same shall be disposed of by the learned Trial Judge as early as possible.

¶51