01Facts
Crime No. 216/2026 was registered by Honnali Police Station on a complaint dated 14 August 2026 alleging that the accused had quarrelled with the complainant’s family over accusations of banana theft and that accused Nos. 1 and 2 later assaulted the injured victim, Anjaneya, on 13 August 2026.
¶ 3 · pp. 3–5The victim reportedly suffered multiple grievous injuries, including fractures, and had been hospitalised for 15 days; at the hearing, the State informed the Court that he was again in hospital receiving treatment.
¶ 6–7 · p. 5Accused No. 1’s application for regular bail and accused Nos. 2 and 3’s application for anticipatory bail had been rejected by the Sessions Court on 1 September 2026.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–4The accused sought bail in the High Court under Sections 482 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
¶ 1 · p. 302Issues
i.Whether accused No. 1 should be enlarged on regular bail in Crime No. 216/2026.
¶ 3, 8 · pp. 3, 5–6ii.Whether accused Nos. 2 and 3 should be granted anticipatory bail in the same crime.
¶ 4, 8 · pp. 4–603Law Applied
The petitions invoked Sections 482 and 483 of the BNSS, 2023, governing anticipatory and regular bail, respectively.
¶ 1 · p. 3The alleged offences were under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 109, 126(2), 329(4), 351(2) and 352, read with Section 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
¶ 1 · p. 3The Court cited no precedent or elaborated general bail test; its decision rested on the allegations, the roles attributed to the accused, and the seriousness and medical consequences of the assault.
¶ 5–8 · pp. 4–6Provisions in the judgment · 12 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 438Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115Section 118Section 109Section 126Section 329Section 351Section 352Section 3
04Reasoning
The Court distinguished the accused according to the allegations and the relief sought.
¶ 5–8 · pp. 4–6The FIR specifically attributed the 13 August assault to accused Nos. 1 and 2, and the victim’s multiple grievous injuries, fractures, prolonged hospitalisation and renewed admission weighed against granting bail to those accused.
¶ 5–8 · pp. 4–6It therefore declined both accused No. 1’s regular-bail request and accused No. 2’s anticipatory-bail request.
¶ 8 · p. 6It granted accused No. 3 anticipatory bail, subject to conditions.
¶ 8 · p. 605Holding
The Court dismissed Crl.P. No. 14907/2026 and dismissed Crl.P. No. 15201/2026 insofar as it concerned accused No. 2, but allowed it insofar as it concerned accused No. 3.
Order, clauses (i)–(ii) · p. 6Accused No. 3 was directed to be released in the event of arrest upon appearing before the Investigating Officer within 15 days, executing a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum, and complying with conditions concerning court attendance, cooperation with the investigation, non-interference with witnesses and non-involvement in similar offences.
Order, clause (iii)(a)–(d) · pp. 6–7Original Court PDF
KIRANvsTHE STATE BY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
