Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2580 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
1. DIVYA KAUSHAL GARG
S/O UMESH CHANDRA GUPTA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
FLAT NO-001, HARI HARA NIVAS,
7TH CROSS, RACHENAHALLI,
THANISANDRA, BENGALURU CITY,
KARNATAKA-560 077.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SUDHINDRA S A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SAMPIGEHALLI POLICE,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2.
SMT. PRANAYA D
W/O DIVYA KAUSHAL GARG,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
FLAT NO-001, HARI HARA NIVAS,
7TH CROSS, RACHENAHALLI,
THANISANDRA, BENGALURU CITY,
KARNATAKA-560 077.
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: High Court of
Karnataka
ALSO R/AT- HOUSE OF GRACE,
5TH CROSS, CHURCH STREET,
VEERENAHALLI, VIRGO NAGAR POST,
BANGALORE- 560 049 (AS POR L.P.T).
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1
SRI.TIMOTHY CHERLES, ADV. FOR R2)
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT
THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO A. SET ASIDE
ANTICIPATORY BAIL REJECTION ORDER DATED 18.12.2025
PASSED IN CRL.MISC NO.10926/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE
HONBLE LXX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPECIAL JUDGE AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appellant has preferred this appeal against the
order passed by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH No.71) in
Crl. Misc. No.10926/2025 dated 18.12.2025.
2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that on
the basis of the complaint filed by one Smt. Pranaya.D,
Sampigehalli Police have registered the case in Crime
No.503/2025 against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences
punishable under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,
Section 85, 79, 115(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA)
Act, 1989.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
3. All the three accused have filed application
under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory
bail in the event of their arrest. The trial Court has allowed
the petition filed on behalf of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 and
granted anticipatory bail with conditions. However,
rejected the bail application of the present appellant.
Being aggrieved by rejection of bail, the appellant/accused
No.1 has preferred this appeal.
4. Respondent No.2 appeared before this Court
and filed statement of objection and sought for rejecting
the appeal. Respondent No.2 has produced 13 documents
and also relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of;
i) Kiran v. Rajkumar JIvraj Jain and Ors., reported
in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1886.
ii) S.Anbalagan v. A.Devarajan and Ors., reported
in (1984) 2 SCC 112.
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
iii) Priti d/o Ashok Chakranarayan v. State of
Maharashtra and Anr., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Bom
1805 .
5. I have examined the materials placed before
this Court. On the basis of the complaint filed by
Smt.Pranaya.D, Sampigehalli Police have registered the
case in Crime No.503/2025 against accused Nos.1 to 3 for
the offences punishable under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, Section 85, 79, 115(2), 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and 3(1)(r)(s) of SC
and ST (POA) Act, 1989.
6. Accused No.1 is the husband of the
complainant, accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the parent-in-laws
of the complainant. The appellant has produced the copy
of the complaint filed by the complainant, prior to filing
this complaint. On the basis of the complaint, the police
have registered the case in LPT No.527/2025. In this
regard, the present appellant/accused No.1 and his
mother Smt.Uma Gupta/accused No.2 have filed
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
Crl. Misc. No. 10070/2025 before the LXXI Addl. City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-72) under
Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail
and same came to be allowed on 19.11.2025 by granting
anticipatory bail with conditions. After passing this order,
the complainant has lodged a complaint on 01.12.2025. In
the FIR, it is stated that the alleged commission of offence
is between 28.11.2024 and 26.11.2025. There is a delay
of 5 days in filing this present complaint. The complainant
has not challenged the order passed by the Sessions Court
in Crl. Misc. No. 10926/2025. The averments pertaining to
Crl. Misc. No. 10926/2025 are also included in the present
complaint as the alleged offence commencing from
28.11.2024 till 26.11.2025.
7. Respondent No.2 has also not challenged the
order passed by the trial Court as to the granting of
anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 2 and 3. In the
complaint, it is stated that her mother-in-law and
husband followed the complainant in front of Manyata
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
residency where they both shouted caste slurs and publicly
humiliated the complainant in the presence of residents
and security guards. Though these allegations made in the
complaint, the trial Court has granted anticipatory bail to
the mother-in-laws, who is accused No. 2 and to accused
No.3 in this case. Same is not challenged by the
respondent No.2 or the State.
8. Additionally, even on careful examination of the
contents of the complaint, it is crystal clear that the
accused has not referred the caste while abusing the
complainant before the public. The name of the security
guards and residents also not disclosed by the
complainant. Therefore, at this stage, I am of the
considered view that, there is no prima- facie material to
attract the alleged commission of offence under the penal
provisions of SC and ST (POA) Act, 1989. The other
remaining offences are not punishable with death penalty
or imprisonment for life and are exclusively triable by the
Court of Magistrate. Apart from this, though the
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
Investigating Officer has registered the case on
01.12.2025, till this day he has not issued the notice
under Section 35 of BNSS, 2023. The conduct of the
Investigating Officer reveals that the present appellant is
not required for custodial interrogation. Taking into
consideration of the nature and gravity of offence,
relationship between the complainant and the present
accused/appellant who are husband and wife, previous
antecedents of the appellant and also conduct of the
Investigating Officer as well as on the principle of parity, it
is just and proper to allow this appeal with conditions.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal is allowed.
ii) The order passed by the LXX Additional City
Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru
(CCH No.71) dated 18.12.2025 in Crl. Misc.
No.10926/2025 against this appellant is set aside.
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
Consequently, application filed under Section 482 of
BNNS, 2023 on behalf of this appellant/accused No.1 is
allowed, subject to following conditions:
a) The appellant/accused No.1 shall not
repeat similar kind of offences. He shall furnish
proof of his identity and address and shall inform
the I.O in case of change of address.
b) The appellant/accused No.1 shall not
tamper with the evidence and threaten the
prosecution witnesses in any manner.
c) The appellant/accused No.1 shall
co-operate with the investigating officer for the
purpose of investigation, as and when required.
d) The appellant/accused No.1 shall
surrender before the investigating officer within
20 days from the date of this order and execute
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC:1055
CRL.A No. 2580 of 2025
HC-KAR
personal bond with surety, as ordered above,
without fail.
v) The appellant/accused No.1 shall
appear before the Court on all the dates of
hearing without fail.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
KBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9