Karnataka HC Denies Bail To Husband Accused Of Killing Wife, Grants Two Co-Accused Bail, Citing No Material Directly Linking Them

The prosecution alleged that Chaitali, married to Accused No. 1, was subjected to physical and mental harassment. It alleged that Accused No. 1 assaulted her with an iron rod, causing her death, and that Accused Nos. 2–6 conspired to portray the incident as a road accident.

After investigation, a charge sheet was filed against Accused Nos. 1–6 for offences under Sections 85, 92, 103(1), 189(6) and 238 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

Accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

The petitions were considered under Section 483 of the BNSS, corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail.

The alleged offences were under Sections 85, 92, 103(1), 189(6) and 238 read with Section 190 of the BNS.

In exercising its bail discretion, the Court considered the nature and strength of the material against each petitioner, the gravity of the offence, the recovery evidence, and parity with a co-accused who had been granted bail.

The Court found that the post-mortem report attributed death to a head injury and that the iron rod had been recovered pursuant to Accused No. 1’s voluntary statement; these matters prima facie connected him to the alleged assault.

By contrast, the Court considered the material against Accused Nos. 4 and 5 insufficiently substantial: no recovery was made from them, no other material directly connected them to the offence, and no motive was attributed to them.

It also noted that Accused No. 6, whom it considered similarly placed, had been granted bail.

The Court therefore distinguished the petitioners on the basis of the evidence and the alleged role attributed to each.

Accused Nos. 4 and 5 were ordered released on bail on execution of a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 each with two sureties for the like sum, subject to conditions not to threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses and not to commit offences in future; breach would permit the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.

The Court clarified that its observations were confined to disposal of the bail petitions.