Bail may be granted where the injured victim has been discharged and is out of danger.

The petitioner and the de facto complainant were neighbours.

The prosecution alleged that, following a dispute over branches and leaves from the petitioner’s banana tree falling into the complainant’s compound, the petitioner entered the complainant’s house on 13 April 2026 and attacked Veerabhadrappa with a knife.

The victim sustained eight injuries, of which three were grievous, and was later discharged from hospital.

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

After the charge-sheet was filed, he sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in proceedings arising from Crime No. 69/2026.

1. Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, having regard to the alleged offences and the circumstances of the case

2. Whether the prosecution’s concerns about witness tampering and interference with the trial justified refusing bail

The petition was considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of bail.

The alleged offences were under Sections 109(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959.

The Court cited no precedents or further legal tests; its stated considerations were the nature and gravity of the offences, the petitioner’s antecedents, and the victim’s condition.

The Court noted that the incident arose from a neighbourhood dispute concerning the banana tree and that the victim had been discharged from hospital and was out of danger.

It considered those circumstances alongside the nature and gravity of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedents, and concluded that bail was warranted despite the prosecution’s concerns about possible witness tampering.

The Court addressed those concerns through conditions prohibiting witness interference and requiring the petitioner to attend court and cooperate with the investigation.

Bail was subject to conditions including regular court attendance, no tampering with or threatening prosecution witnesses, cooperation with the Investigating Officer, and no involvement in similar offences; breach could lead the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.