Ankanayaka H S @ Ankappa Vs State by

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.222/2025 ON THE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MYSURU ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.172/2025 OF NANJANGUD RURAL POLICE, MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 85, 108 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.

¶30

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

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for

¶36

grant of regular bail in S.C.No.222/2025 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mysore, arising out of Crime No.172/2025 of respondent-police, for the offences under Sections 85 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶37

Brief facts of the case:

¶38

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased-Mahalakshmi @ Putti. The father of the deceased lodged a complaint against the petitioner/son-in-law that the petitioner used to harass his daughter in her matrimonial home in one or the other pretext. It is further alleged that the petitioner had an illicit relationship with another woman. The said relationship came to the knowledge of the deceased. Thereafter, there were frequent quarrels between the husband and wife on the said issue. Both were not in

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

good and cordial terms. The deceased had left the company of the petitioner on earlier occasion and she was staying in her parents’ house. Thereafter, she went back after panchayat was held between the couple. It is alleged that on 07.08.2025, the deceased committed suicide in her matrimonial home on account of the said ill-treatment/harassment of which she had been subjected to. Hence, the complaint.

¶42

The respondent-police after registering the case, conducted investigation and submitted the charge sheet. The matter is pending for consideration before the Trial Court. The date has to be fixed for the trial.

¶43

Heard Sri. Raju C.N., learned counsel for the

¶44

petitioner and Sri. Rangaswamy R., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

¶45

The submission of the learned counsel for the

¶46

petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶47

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Two small children are there, he has to take care of the children. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 07.08.2025. There are no eyewitnesses. Though, the prosecution has cited some witnesses and depicted them as eyewitnesses to the incident, they are the neighbours.

¶50

They have been set up only for the purpose of this case. The usual course of quarrel that had taken place in the house cannot be construed as harassment or ill-treatment. The deceased might have committed suicide for some other reason. However, the petitioner cannot be roped into the case since he is the husband of the deceased.

¶51

6. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the

¶52

earning member of the family. He has to take care of his small children. Therefore, he may be released on bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. In the event of his release on bail, he will abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶53

6 -

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

7. Per contra , learned High Court Government

¶57

Pleader vehemently submitted that there are eyewitnesses

¶58

to the incident, who are the neighbours. CWs.6 and 7 are the neighbours and CW.8 is the son of the deceased. Further, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the petitioner has committed heinous offence and he has instigated the deceased to commit suicide by scolding her. Hence, the petition may be rejected. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.

¶59

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint and also charge sheet, which would indicate that the petitioner married the deceased on 22.03.2017. The couple had two children namely Yashwanth and Bhuvan. There was a quarrel between the couple in respect of the illicit relationship of the petitioner with another woman. The panchayath was held between the couple by the

¶60

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

well-wishers and relatives. However, it was not resolved amicably. Thereafter, on 07.08.2025, it is stated in the complaint that the deceased had committed suicide on account of the ill-treatment to which she had been subjected to.

¶63

Be that as it may, having gone through the

¶64

averments of the complaint and also in the interest of the children, it is appropriate to consider the application.

¶65

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶66

ORDER

¶67

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶68

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.222/2025 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mysuru, arising out of in Crime No.172/2025 of respondent-police, for the offences under Sections 85, 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only)

¶69

8 -

¶70

NC: 2026:KHC:12754 CRL.P No. 58 of 2026

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶73

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

¶74

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

¶75

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

¶76

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶77

KA/BSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Ankanayaka H S @ Ankappa v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankanayaka H S @ Ankappa v. State by

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

Sri Vijayasarathy M S Vs M/S Gokul Films

Sri. N.S. Vishwanath Vs Kum. Khushi Radhya

Smt N Usha Vs the State of Karnataka

Ravi Vs State of Karnataka

Mr.Azmatulla Khan Vs the State by Dj Halli Police Station

Shri. Umren Sharieff Vs State of Karnataka