Karnataka High Court
Criminal Procedure and EvidenceCriminal Law

Completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet supported grant of anticipatory bail.

SRI. NITHESHKUMAR, vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 30, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet supported grant of anticipatory bail.. SRI. NITHESHKUMAR, vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners, Accused Nos. 3 and 5 in Crime No. 61/2026, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered by Cubbon Park Police for offences under Sections 108, 115(2), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

Source reference: p. 3

The complaint alleged that Accused No. 5 had quarrelled with the deceased, Suresh Kumar Purohit, in Rajasthan and later instigated others to assault him in Bengaluru on the night of 2–3 April 2026; the deceased died by suicide later that day

Source reference: pp. 3–4

The FIR was registered on 22 April 2026, nearly three weeks after the death

Source reference: p. 4

The Sessions Court rejected the petitioners’ bail application on 2 September 2026

Source reference: p. 3

The investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed by the time this petition was considered

Source reference: p. 5
02

Issues

Whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail in Crime No. 61/2026

Source reference: pp. 3, 5

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted subject to conditions in light of the allegations, the circumstances of the deceased’s death, and the completed investigation

Source reference: pp. 4–6
03

Law 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. 2

The alleged offences were under Sections 108, 115(2), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The Court also referred to its earlier order in Crl.P. No. 6899/2026, which had observed that the absence of injuries suggesting a brutal assault, and an alleged assault with hands and legs following a quarrel, did not by themselves provide a sufficient reason for a prudent person to commit suicide

Source reference: p. 5

The order does not set out a separate general test for anticipatory bail.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the alleged prior quarrel and threat, the subsequent alleged assault, and the fact that the deceased died by suicide on the same date

Source reference: pp. 3–4

It noted the delay of nearly three weeks in registering the FIR

Source reference: p. 4

It relied on its earlier assessment of the medical and surrounding circumstances, including the absence of injuries indicating a brutal assault

Source reference: p. 5

As the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed, the Court concluded that anticipatory bail could be granted, subject to conditions

Source reference: p. 5
05

Holding

The Court allowed the petition and directed that the petitioners be released on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 61/2026

Each petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days, execute a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties (one local), attend the Trial Court unless exempted, cooperate with the police, refrain from tampering with witnesses, and not commit similar offences in future

Source reference: pp. 6–7
06

Acts & Sections Cited

6 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, 20234

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI. NITHESHKUMAR,vsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

Karnataka High Court · September 30, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment