Sri Dhareppa & Ors. vs The State Of Karnataka

Heard Sri. Prashant Mathapati, learned counsel for the petitioners and Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for the respondent – State.

This petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS (U/s.438 of Cr.P.C.) by the petitioners/accused No.1 to 5 and 7 to 9 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.240/2026 of Mudhol Police Station, Bagalkote District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 74, 76, 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending on the file of learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Mudhol.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

The de facto complainant and the petitioners are relatives and neighbors. There is a dispute between the defacto complainant and the family of the petitioners regarding parking of motorcycle on public road. On 17.08.2026 at about 10:00 p.m., when the defacto complainant was sitting in front of her house, accused No.2 allegedly outraged the modesty of the defacto complainant. Hence, she informed her parents. At that juncture, a quarrel took place between both the parties. The petitioners assaulted defacto complainant and her family members with stone, club, sickle axe and caused severe injuries. Hence, lodged the complaint. Apprehending the arrest at the hands of respondent-police, the petitioners have filed this petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are relatives and neighbors. They have been falsely implicated in the case. There is a case and counter case between the parties. In fact, the petitioners have lodged complaint first. However as a counter blast, the defacto complainant lodged the present complaint. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is further contended that the injured persons are already been discharged from the hospital. Hence, learned counsel for petitioner prayed to allow the petition.

Per contra, learned HCGP contended that the petitioners are accused of committing heinous offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC (109(1) of BNSS, 2023). The petitioners allegedly assaulted the defacto complainant and her family members with dangerous weapons. Hence, there is a prima facie material against them. Thus, learned HCGP prayed to dismiss the petition.

Perused the material available on record. It is evident that the petitioners and the family of defacto complainant are neighbors. The dispute arose, as accused No. 1 and 2 brought motorcycle and they parked their vehicle in the road. Hence, a quarrel took place between both the parties. They assaulted the defacto complainant and her family members with sickle axe, rod and club and caused injuries.

Learned HCCP submits that all the injured persons are already discharged from the hospital and there is no threat to their life.

Admittedly, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and there is a case and counter case between the parties. The record reveals that the petitioners have lodged complaint first in Crime No.239 of 2026 of respondent - police. It shows that the petitioners have lodged complaint first and as a counter blast, the defacto complainant brought the subsequent complaint against these petitioners.

It is well established principles of law that while granting bail, the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, circumstances in which the offence is committed, the position and status of the petitioners with reference to the victim and witnesses, likelihood of fleeing away from justice, of repeating same offences by the petitioners, of tampering with the witnesses, character and antecedents of the petitioners. Further, the law is well settled that while disposing of the bail petition, the Court need not scan the prosecution papers and hold mini trial.

Keeping all these factors in mind, upon perusal of the entire material placed on record this court is of the considered view that, prima facie there are no reasonable and sufficient grounds to believe, at this stage, that the petitioners are guilty of the offences alleged against him. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for Anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

The Criminal Petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioners/accused No.1 to 5 and 7 to 9 on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.240/2026 of Mudhol Police Station, Bagalkote District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 74, 76, 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending on the file of learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Mudhol, subject to the following conditions: