Allowed

Smt. Bharathi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Jan 2026CRL.P/16920/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, accused Nos.3 and 4 in a dowry-related abetment of suicide case, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS. With charge sheet filed, no criminal antecedents and no custodial-interrogation need, the court granted conditional anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions: bail bond Rs.1,00,000 each with surety within fifteen days; no tampering with witnesses; attend trial court on all hearing dates.

Smt. Bharathi Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16920 OF 2025

¶9

(438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SMT. BHARATHI WIFE OF RAMAMURTHY.K AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.

¶12

SRI. RAMAMURTHY.K SON OF KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.

¶13

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT MANDUR VILLAGE, MANDUR POST, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560049

¶14

ALLEGEDLY MENTIONED IN THE FIR AS RAMALINGAPURA VILLAGE, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 105

¶15

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

(BY SRI. RAJESH GOWDA.,ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DIBBURAHALLI POLICE STATION DIBBURAHALLI, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK-562 105 REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE- 560 001.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

(BY SRI.MODH. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE / DIBBURAHALLI POLICE STATION, DIBBURAHALLI, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK, TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST BY DIBBURAHALLI POLICE STATION, DIBBURAHALLI, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK / RESPONDENT POLICE, UNDER SECTIONS 115(2), 85, 80(2), 108, 352 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF D.P ACT AND ON ITS FILE IN CRIME NO. 181/2025, ON THE FILE ADDL CIVIL JUDGE {SR.DN} AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, SIDLAGHATTA.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

This petition is filed by accused Nos.3 and 4 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.181/2025 of Dibburahalli Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 85, 80(2), 108, 352, read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

The learned counsel for petitioners would

¶34

contend that the marriage of the accused No.1 with the deceased was a love marriage. The only allegation against these petitioners is that they are sister of accused No.1 and sister's husband of accused No.1 and they came to the house of deceased on 08.10.2025 along with accused No.5. They harassed the deceased to bring more money and went back to their place. He further contented that the petitioners are residents of Mandur village and the deceased was residing in her husband's house at Ramalingapura which is at a distance of 60 kilometres. The accused No.5, who is similarly placed to that of these petitioners has been granted bail by this Court. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. With this, he prays to allow the petition.

¶35

Per contra, the learned Additional State Public

¶36

Prosecutor for the respondent/State would contend that the petitioners came to the house of the deceased on

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

08.10.2025 and they along with accused No.5 harassed

¶41

the deceased to bring dowry. The deceased committed suicide on the next date. The death of the deceased is within seven years of her marriage. The offence alleged against the petitioners is a heinous offence. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

¶42

Having heard the learned counsels, the Court

¶43

has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

¶44

The accused No.1 is husband of deceased Shirisha. The marriage of accused No.1 with the deceased was love marriage taken place on 06.09.2024 in a temple. In that regard, there was a complaint against the accused persons and the accused persons have undertaken to take care of the deceased. Thereafter, there was a reception on 16.03.2025. At that time, accused No.1 has demanded dowry from the parents of the deceased. It is alleged that accused No.1 was harassing the deceased to bring the dowry from her parents. The allegation against the

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

petitioners is that on 08.10.2025, they came to

¶48

Ramalingapura Village and they along with accused No.5 neighbour harassed the deceased physically and mentally demanding dowry and went back to their place. On 09.10.2025, which is the next day, the deceased committed suicide. On 09.10.2025, in the evening, when deceased came back from college, accused Nos.1, 2 and 5 have harassed the deceased and told her that if she dies, accused No.1 will marry another lady. Thereafter, on the same evening, the deceased has consumed poison and committed suicide. The petitioners are the sister-in-law and husband of sister-in-law of the deceased. The petitioners are residing in Manduru Village. The deceased and her husband were residing in Ramalingapura. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents

¶49

of the petitioners.

¶50

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Considering the above aspects, the petitioners

¶54

have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions.

¶55

In the result, the following:

¶56

ORDER

¶57

i) The petition is allowed.

¶58

ii) The petitioners are ordered to be released on

¶59

bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.181/2025 of Dibburahalli Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 85, 80(2), 108, 352, read with Sections 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 subject to following conditions.

¶60

a) The petitioners shall voluntarily appear before the jurisdictional Court within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶61

NC: 2026:KHC:4601 CRL.P No. 16920 of 2025

¶62

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

b) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.

¶65

c) The petitioners shall attend the Trial Court on all dates hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶66

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶67

bkm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

Smt. Bharathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Bharathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Faran Vs the State of Karnataka by

Awaze @ Avez Khan Vs State of Karnataka

Manoj Kumar. N Vs State of Karnataka

Kushi @ Soni @ Fathima Banu Vs State of Karnataka

Smt T Vanitha Vs State of Karnataka

Chandrashekar J M Vs the State of Karnataka