A hostile injured witness does not justify bail when sharp-edged weapon injuries are corroborated on record.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 19/2025 registered at Police Station Aawapalli, District Bijapur, for an alleged offence under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The prosecution alleged that, on 22 November 2025 at approximately 1:00 a.m., the applicant assaulted his wife, Kanta Burka, with a sharp-pointed knife after suspecting her character and alleged illicit relationship, causing injuries to her chest and back.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), asserting false implication, absence of recovery of any weapon or incriminating material, and that the injured witness had turned hostile and denied the incident and his involvement.

The State opposed bail, noting that the charge-sheet had been filed and relying upon the allegation that the applicant had assaulted his wife with a sharp-pointed knife.

The applicant had remained in custody since 23 November 2025.

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and requires consideration of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the material available on record, and the circumstances of the case.

The alleged substantive offence was Section 109(1) of the BNS.

The Court also applied the settled bail principle that bail is discretionary and must be determined on an overall assessment of the allegations, gravity of the offence, and prima facie material, without conducting a detailed examination of the merits.

Although the injured complainant had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution during examination-in-chief, the Court found that the material on record prima facie established that she had sustained injuries caused by a sharp-edged weapon.

The allegation that the applicant attacked his wife with a knife, allegedly due to suspicion regarding her character and relationship, was treated as serious.

Weighing the nature and gravity of the accusation against the applicant’s submissions regarding non-recovery of the weapon, absence of independent eyewitnesses, and the hostile testimony, the Court held that these factors did not make the case suitable for bail at that stage.

The Court expressly refrained from commenting on the merits of the prosecution case.

The Court directed the trial court to make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within four months from receipt of the certified copy of the order, subject to there being no legal impediment.

A certified copy was directed to be transmitted to the trial court for information and compliance.