Smt Sangeetha N Vs State of Karnataka by

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.99/2025 OF NANJANGUDU TOWN POLICE STATION, MYSURU, FOR OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 126(2), 54, 103(1), 61(1)(2)(A), 238 READ WITH 3(5) OF B.N.S., 2023, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., NANJANGUD.

¶32

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:16344 CRL.P No. 1819 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

The petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.1, is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.99/2025 registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 54, 103(1), 61(1)(2)(a), 238 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶39

Brief facts of the case:

¶40

The case of the prosecution is that the complainant / deceased was doing the business of selling fiber doors and his shop was situated at Basaveshwara Circle, Thagaduru, Nanjanagud. It is further stated that he married the petitioner herein four years ago. The petitioner was working as a Computer Operator at Devanooru Grama Panchayath. It is stated that, on 25.10.2025, around 07.45 p.m., when the complainant and his wife were proceeding on their scooter near MUDA Layout at Handuvinahalli, a white car stopped in front of them. Four unknown persons alighted from the car and stabbed the complainant on the abdomen and caused him

¶41

4 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:16344 CRL.P No. 1819 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

to sustain severe injuries. The respondent - police have registered a case and conducted the investigation. During investigation, it is alleged that the deceased complainant, Rajendra, was unhappy about the conduct of the petitioner and he used to assault her on several occasions and instructed her to mend her ways. The petitioner contacted accused No.2 and requested him to eliminate Rajendra as she was fed up with the attitude of her husband Rajendra. Accused No.2 contacted accused No.3 and the child-in-conflict on 19.10.2025. They conspired together to commit the murder of the deceased. Accordingly, they hired a car bearing its registration No.KA09-MB-2499 Volkswagen and thereafter, they caused injuries to the said Rajendra. Later, the said Rajendra died due to the said injuries. Hence, the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner and others.

¶45

Heard Sri Tejas N., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harish Ganapathy, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.

¶46

5 -

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:16344 CRL.P No. 1819 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is

¶50

that, initially, a complaint came to be registered by the deceased Rajendra against unknown persons. During investigation, the name of the present petitioner has been disclosed and it is alleged that, she had given instructions to accused No.2 to eliminate the deceased Rajendra, who is none other than her husband. However, the entire episode has been narrated by the co-accused. There is no evidence to show that the petitioner had given the task of committing the murder of the deceased. In fact, the petitioner is the eyewitness to the incident. However, she had been implicated in this case falsely in order to harass her. The petitioner is aged about 32 years old, and he is a permanent resident of Nanjangud Taluk, Mysuru. She will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of her release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶51

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State vehemently submitted that the

¶52

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:16344 CRL.P No. 1819 of 2026

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

petitioner, being the wife of the deceased, had given a supari to accused No.2 to eliminate her husband, stating that she had been subjected to cruelty at the hands of her husband. The said fact has been disclosed by the co-accused when they made the statement before the respondent - police. Since the petitioner had committed a heinous offence, which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life, she is not entitled to the relief as prayed for in the petition. Hence, the petition has to be rejected. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.

¶55

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the averments of the complaint and also the averments of the charge sheet, it appears that the present petitioner had given supari to commit murder of her husband to accused No.2. However, there is no definite evidence to indicate that she had given such instruction or supari to accused No.2 as per the available documents on record. Moreover, she is a female and having deep root in the Society. Therefore, it is

¶56

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:16344 CRL.P No. 1819 of 2026

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶59

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶60

ORDER

¶61

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶62

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.99/2025 registered by the respondent-police for the offences stated supra , on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶63