Facts
The petitioners, Accused Nos. 1 to 4, sought anticipatory bail in Crime No. 254/2026, registered by Bidadi Police Station for offences under Sections 351(2), 336(3), 336(2), 340(1), 352, 316(2) and 318(4), read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).
Source reference: p. 3The case arose from a dispute connected to a civil suit filed by Ramegowda against the first informant, Shankar. The first informant alleged that, after a disagreement concerning money paid to Accused No. 6 for documents, the petitioners and others threatened and assaulted him; he suffered no injury.
Source reference: pp. 3–5The Sessions Court had rejected the petitioners’ anticipatory-bail application on 2 September 2026. Accused No. 6 had been granted regular bail by the High Court.
Source reference: pp. 3–5Issues
Whether the petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 254/2026.
Source reference: pp. 3, 5Whether anticipatory bail should be subject to conditions securing the petitioners’ cooperation with the investigation and attendance before the Trial Court.
Source reference: pp. 5–6Law Applied
The petition was considered under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the provision invoked for anticipatory bail.
Source reference: p. 3The Court assessed the request in light of the allegations, the petitioners’ respective roles, the absence of injury to the informant, the petitioners’ lack of criminal antecedents and their undertaking to cooperate with the investigation.
Source reference: p. 5The order cites no precedent or separate substantive legal test.
Source reference: pp. 3–6Reasoning
The Court noted that the allegations against the petitioners concerned abusing and assaulting the informant with their hands, and that the informant had sustained no injury.
Source reference: p. 5It also took into account that the petitioners had no criminal antecedents and had undertaken to cooperate with the police.
Source reference: pp. 5–6In these circumstances, the Court considered anticipatory bail appropriate, subject to conditions requiring the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer, cooperate with the investigation, attend the Trial Court, avoid tampering with prosecution witnesses and refrain from similar offences.
Source reference: pp. 5–6Holding
The Court allowed the petition and directed that, in the event of arrest in Crime No. 254/2026, the petitioners be released on bail.
Each petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days of receiving the order and execute a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties for the like amount; they must also comply with the attendance, cooperation, non-tampering and non-reoffending conditions set out in the order.
Source reference: pp. 6–7Acts & Sections Cited
9 provisions across 3 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20237
Original Court PDF
SRI. YALLAMMA,vsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
