Arun Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.226/2025 REGISTERED AT VIVEKNAGAR P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE XXIX ACJM, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner herein who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.226/2025 filed by the respondent – Police for the offences punishable under Section 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNS) seeking for regular bail.

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Factual matrix of the case:

¶29

The case of the prosecution is that a complaint

¶30

came to be filed by the complainant stating that he was working as a cashier at Bharat Petrol Bunk, situated on Koramangala Ring Road, Bengaluru. On 10.12.2025 at about 11.20 p.m., while he was on duty he saw that one person was quarreling with the employee of the said petrol bunk. The complainant went there and saw that one

¶31

person being a customer had not pay the amount for which he got the petrol filled to his bike. When the cashier questioned as to why he had not paid the amount, a quarrel had ensued between the cashier/complainant and the customer. Thereafter, it is said that the amount has

¶32

been paid through phonepe to one Nirmal who was working as an employee of the said petrol bunk. The said Nirmal had in turn paid the amount to the cashier. It is alleged that after 15 minutes from the date of the earlier incident the petitioner went along with another person to the said petrol bunk and it is alleged that he assaulted

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

with knife on the vital parts of the body of the injured/complainant. Consequently, the complainant had sustained bleeding injuries. Thereafter, he was taken to St. John’s Hospital for treatment, where he made a statement before the Police. The same has been recorded by the Police and it has been reduced into F.I.R. After completing the investigation submitted the charge-sheet.

¶36

Heard Sri. Subhash R., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Asma Kouser, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for respondent.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had no intention to commit any assault or injuries to any of the employees of the said petrol bunk. However, the complainant had provoked and abused the petitioner in a filthy language. Consequently, the said fight had taken place. Though, it is alleged that the petitioner has used deadly weapon to cause injuries, the fact remains that, the wound certificate would indicate that the

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

injury caused to the complainant is simple in nature. The petitioner is the permanent resident of Bengaluru and he is aged about 33 years. There is no criminal antecedents against the said petitioner. Hence, the petition may be allowed and he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. He will abide by the conditions to be imposed in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶41

Per contra, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for respondent – State of Karnataka vehemently submitted that the petitioner has committed heinous offence. He has assaulted with a deadly weapon like knife and caused injuries to the vital parts of the body. If, the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of not only absconding, but also, threatening the prosecution witnesses. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions learned Additional

¶42

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Special Public Prosecutor for respondent – State prays to reject the petition.

¶45

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the charge-sheet. It

¶46

appears from the record that a quarrel had taken place between the complainant who was working as a cashier and the petitioner. Though, it is alleged that the petitioner has assaulted with knife on the neck of the injured, the fact remains that, the said injury is simple in nature. Having considered the said aspects, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶47

Hence I proceed to pass the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

i. This Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶50

ii. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged

¶51

on bail in Crime No.226/2025 filed by

¶52

NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶53

7 -

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

the respondent – Police for the offences punishable under Section 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶56

iii. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

¶57

iv. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates, without fail.

¶58

v. The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.

¶59

8 -

¶60

NC: 2026:KHC:18380 CRL.P No. 1810 of 2026

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

In case, the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions mentioned above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of

¶63

bail.

¶64

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶65

NM

Arun Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swapan Ghosh Vs the State of Karnataka by

Prakash Vs State of Karnataka

Hidayath Ulla Khan Vs State by Suddagunte Palya

Smt Asha a B Vs State by Holehonnur Police Station

Sri Malik Imran @ Imran Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Faizal Vs the State of Karnataka