Mr.Puttaswamy Gowda M S Vs State of Karnataka

MR. PUTTASWAMY GOWDA. M. S @ SANTHOSA @ SANTHU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, SON OF M.K. SHIVANNA @ SHIVEGOWDA, RESIDING AT MANDALEEKANAHALLI VILLAGE, HIRISAVE HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATTNA, HASSAN-573 116.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. N.S. SRIRAJ GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA, N BY KUDUR POLICE STATION, Location: SHIVAGANGE ROAD, High KUDUR-561 101. Court of REPRESENTED BY Karnataka THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY MS. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL. SPP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER, ENLARGING THE

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

PETITIONER no.4 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.6706/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 118(1), 118(2), 109, 49, 61(1), READ WITH 3(5) OF THE BNS, 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MAGADI AND THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SPL.JUDGE RAMANAGARA C/C III ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE, RAMANAGARA HAS DISMISSED THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL PETITION ON 14.01.2026 IN CRL.MISC NO.1048/2025.

¶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

The petitioner/accused No.4 is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.287/2025 of respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 118(2), 109, 49, 61(1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in Criminal Case No.6706/2025 on the file of the learned 1^st Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Magadi, Bangalore South District.

¶26

The case of the prosecution is that the complaint came to be lodged by Devaraju, who is stated to be an agriculturist engaged in agricultural activities. It is alleged that there is a civil dispute between his father and

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

accused No.1, Lakshmamma. The said Lakshmamma frequently visited the land in question and quarrelled with the complainant’s family members; as a result, a complaint had been lodged earlier before the police.

¶30

It is further alleged that on 15.01.2025, accused No.1 came to the land along with her henchmen and threatened the complainant and his father. Immediately thereafter, the complainant contacted the police through the helpline, and the parties were taken to the police station. It is stated that they gave an undertaking that they would not commit any such acts in future.

¶31

Thus, it is alleged that on 12.09.2025, accused Nos. 2 and 4, with an intention to commit murder, attempted to run over the father of the complainant (CW2). In the said incident, CW2 sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged by the

¶32

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

complainant, pursuant to that the respondent–police registered a case, and the investigation is in progress.

¶35

The submission of the learned counsel for the

¶36

petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. It is contended that, though it is alleged that he was present in the car at the time of the incident, he had no intention either to cause injury or to commit murder. It is further submitted that the alleged offences are neither severe nor grievous in nature. In fact, the victim has already been discharged from the hospital. In fact, the victim has been discharged from the hospital. The petitioner is aged about 38 years and a permanent resident of Mandaleekanahalli Village, Hirisave Hobli, and he is an earning member of his family and has deep root in the society. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition.

¶37

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently submitted that the civil dispute has resulted in causing the injuries to CW2 by accused Nos. 2 and 4. As per the version of the eyewitnesses, both the said accused were present in the car at the time of the incident and shared a common intention to commit the murder of CW2. However, owing to the intervention of well-wishers and the public, CW2 has survived. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, the Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor prays to reject the petition.

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint. It appears that there is a civil dispute between CW2 and accused No.1. The matter was pending before the Court of Assistant Commissioner, both at Ramanagar and Magadi. Though it is alleged that the petitioner/accused No.4 was present in the car at the time the alleged incident occurred. The fact remained that he was not driving the

¶41

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

car. Considering the said aspect and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

i) The petition is allowed.

¶46

ii) The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest on Crime No.287/2025 of respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 118(2), 109, 49, 61(1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in Criminal Case No.6706/2025 on the file of the learned 1^st Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Magadi, Bangalore South District on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶47

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the

¶48

jurisdictional police within a period of one month from today, and execute a personal bond and also to furnish surety.

¶49

7 -

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:19591 CRL.P No. 3116 of 2026

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

iv) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation till the filing of the final report.

¶53

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

¶54

vi) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

¶55

vii) The petitioner shall not commit any criminal cases till disposal of the case.

¶56

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

¶57

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶58

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Mr.Puttaswamy Gowda M S v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Puttaswamy Gowda M S v. 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

Ashok R Vs State of Karnataka

Surya Vs the State of Karnataka

Mustafa Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Geetha Vs State by

Mohammed Saif @ Saif Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mahadevan @ Deepu Vs the State of Karnataka