Praveen Singh vs The State Of Karnataka

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1421 Kant
Judgement Date : 18 February, 2026

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Praveen Singh vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 February, 2026

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
                                                  -1-
                                                             NC: 2026:KHC:10024
                                                          CRL.P No. 167 of 2026


                      HC-KAR




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                               BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                           CRIMINAL PETITION No. 167 OF 2026 (438(Cr.PC) /
                                             482(BNSS))
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    PRAVEEN SINGH
                            S/O, SATYA NARAYANA SINGH
                            AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
                            R/AT, No. 305, SVS PARADISE
                            6TH CROSS, ALPHA GARDEN
                            KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD
                            AIYAPPA NAGARA, DEVASANDRA
                            BENGALURU-36

                            AS PER FIR
                            PRAVEEN SINGH
                            SVS PARADISE APARTMENT
                            K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU CITY.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER

Digitally signed by   (BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C, ADVOCATE)
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH        AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                      1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            REP. BY HAL POLICE STATION
                            BENGALURU DISTRICT
                            REP. BY ITS
                            STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                            HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                            BENGALURU - 560 001.

                      2.    PADMAVATHI
                            AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2026:KHC:10024
                                    CRL.P No. 167 of 2026


HC-KAR




    W/O SATHISH SINGH
    RESIDING AT 002, CSR
    MARVEL MLA LAYOUT
    KALENA AGRAHARA
    BANNERAGATTA ROAD
    BENGALURU - 76.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1
 SMT. SAHLA NECHIYIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

     THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.P.C
(UNDER SECTION 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.No.402/2025
REGISTERED BY HAL POLICE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
HONBLE 29th ACJM, AT MAYO HALL, FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1),238 OF BNS.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


                     ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.402/2025 of HAL Police Station registered for offences under Section 103(1) and 238 of BNS.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State.

-3-

NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that on the death of deceased, a complaint came to be filed by her mother registered in Crime No.14/2025 for offences under Section 108 and Section 3(5) of BNS. In the said crime, the petitioner has been arrested and taken into police custody for 7 days, interrogated and remanded to judicial custody. In the said crime, the petitioner has been granted interim bail by this Court and subsequently, has been granted regular bail. The said complaint came to be withdrawn by respondent No.2 by making submission before this Court in the petition filed by this petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR and liberty has been given to the mother of the deceased to file complaint. Now the mother has filed the complaint, based on which the present crime is registered for the offence under Sections 103(1) and 238 of BNS. As the petitioner has been taken into police custody and interrogated, his mobile has been seized, now there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Accused Nos.2 to 4 have been granted -4- NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR bail by the Sessions Court. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State would contend that respondent No.2 was under shock after the incident and she stated whatever is stated to her in her earlier complaint. Thereafter liberty has been given to her in the petition filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR in Crime No.14/2025. Therefore, the present complaint is filed. The offence alleged against the petitioner is a heinous offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS. The bank account statement of the deceased indicates that several amounts have been transferred to the account of the petitioner and that itself indicate that the petitioner was harassing the deceased and extracted money from her by threatening that he will disclose her nude photos, videos etc. The deceased had got an offer letter in a Company at Hyderabad and she intended to shift there and intended to join on 14.01.2025. -5-

NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR Therefore, the deceased committing suicide does not arise. There is no death note left by the deceased. The petitioner also has sustained burn injuries. The incident has taken place in a hotel room and it has been booked by this petitioner. The CCTV footage indicates the presence of this petitioner in the said hotel on the day of incident. Even though the crime is registered in August 2025, the petitioner has not yet been arrested and that itself indicate that he is powerful and there are chances of him hampering the investigation. The petitioner has committed heinous offence and he is required for custodial interrogation. On these grounds, both prayed for rejection of the petition.

5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the deceased went with a petrol can to the said hotel and that itself indicate that she has committed suicide.

-6-

NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR

6. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

7. The deceased, who is the daughter of the complainant, died of burn injuries on 12.01.2025. On the death of the deceased her mother filed a complaint and on that basis case has been registered against this petitioner and his wife in Crime No.14/2025 for offence under Section 108 and 3(5) of BNS. In the said complaint, it is alleged that the petitioner and his wife abated the deceased to commit suicide. The petitioner has sought quashing of the said FIR in Crime No.14/2025 by filing a petition before this Court. In the said petition, respondent No.2 who appeared through counsel submitted that she will withdraw the complaint with liberty to file fresh complaint. The said submission has been recorded and respondent No.2 was given liberty to file fresh complaint. With that, the Crime No.14/2025 has been quashed. -7-

NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR

8. The petitioner has been arrested in Crime No.14/2025 on 13.01.2025 and he was taken to police custody for 7 days and he has been interrogated. The petitioner has been granted interim bail on 21.01.2025 and he has been released on bail. The mother of the deceased now has filed complaint on 23.08.2025 and it is registered in Crime No.402/2025 for offences under Section 103(1) and 238 of BNS. The petitioner apprehending his arrest is seeking anticipatory bail in the said crime. Petitioner who has been arrested in Crime No.14/2025 has been interrogated by taking him into police custody for 7 days with regard to offence under Section 108 of BNS. The present case is registered for offence under Section 103(1) of BNS. The earlier investigation does not pertain to the offence under Section 103(1) of BNS. The death of the deceased has taken place in a lodge and it is stated to have been booked by the petitioner. The CCTV footage indicates the presence and movement of the petitioner in the said hotel, and more so, -8- NC: 2026:KHC:10024 CRL.P No. 167 of 2026 HC-KAR the petitioner has also sustained burn injuries. The statement of bank account of the deceased indicates that there are several transfers of thousands of rupees to the account of petitioner. Considering the said aspect, the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation for offence under Section 103(1) of BNS.

9. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner has not made out any grounds for grant of anticipatory bail. In the result, the petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DKB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 Ct.sm