[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Shri Chandrakanth Ananda Kumbar Aliyas ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 February, 2026
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
CRL.P No. 100036 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100036 OF 2026
(438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI CHANDRAKANTH ANANDA KUMBAR @ BHARGAV
AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. PANDIT,
2. SMT. SHWETA
W/O CHANDRAKANTH ANANDA KUMBAR @ BHARGAV
AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE,
3. SRI SURESH @ SURYAKANT ANANDA KUMBAR @
BHARGAV
AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O MAHARANA PRATAP CHOWK, TALDAGE ROAD,
HATTAKNAGALE, HUPARI, RENDAL
TQ. HATKANAGALE, DIST. KOLHAPUR,
STATE MAHARASHTRA 416203.
...PETITIONERS
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN (BY SRI. BHARATHI G BHAT,ADVOCATE)
KATTIMANI
AND:
Digitally signed by
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN BY ITS P.S.I., VIDYAGIRI POLICE STATION, DHARWD
KATTIMANI
Date: 2026.02.04 R/BY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE,
14:56:45 +0530
HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO GRANT THEM ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN
CR.NO. 0203/2025 OF VIDYAGIRI PS DHARWAD, REGISTERED FOR
THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 108, 3(5), 351(2) OF BNS 2023, PENDING
BEFORE 3RD ADDL. CJ AND CJM COURT DHARWAD, HUBLI-DHARWAD,
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
CRL.P No. 100036 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
1. Heard Smt. Bharathi G. Bhat, learned counsel for
the petitioners Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent-State.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused
persons in Crime No.203/2025 of Vidyagiri Police Station,
Dharwad registered for the offences punishable under
Section 108, 3(5) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, with the following prayer:
"Wherefore, the petitioners/accused No.1,
2, 4 most humbly pray that the Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to grant them anticipatory bail in
Cr. No.0203/2025 of Vidyagiri PS Dharwad,
registered for the offences punishable U/s. 108,
3(5), 351(2) of BNS 2023, pending before III
Addl. CJ and CJM Court, Dharwad, Hubli-
Dharwad, in the interest of justice and equity."
3. Facts in nutshell which are utmost necessary for
disposal of the case are as under:
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
3.1. Smt. Sudha W/o. Chennayya Nilajageri, lodged a
complaint with Vidyagiri Police Station in Dharwad stating
that herself, her husband Chennayya (deceased) and
children were residing together at Borgaon, Tq. Nippani.
Smt. Shobha is the first wife of her husband and two
children were born to her.
3.2. When her husband Chennaya was residing at
Borgaon in a rented house, the petitioners herein
contracted him to work as a driver on the promise of paying
Rs.25,000/- per month as salary. But, they retained that
amount with them on the ground that they would get two
guntas plot and a constructed house therein with the salary
earned by him.
3.3. It is further alleged that her husband was worked
as a driver with the petitioners who were indulged in black
magic and but they did not pay the salary to him. Whenever
there was a demand for the salary by her husband,
petitioners used to procure grocery to the complainant's
family but, did not pay the salary.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
3.4. When the matter stood thus, her husband has
worked with the petitioners between 2016 and 2019 and
thereafter, left the job. All the four petitioners visited the
house of the complainant and demanded Rs.10,00,000/-
which was saved by the husband of the complainant.
Having been frightened with the black magic, her husband
left the job and then opened a gift shop.
3.5. Again all the four petitioners visited the shop of
the husband of the complainant and demanded the money.
Same was intimated by her husband to the complainant.
3.6. When the matter stood thus, on 03.12.2025 the
husband of the complainant left the house by informing the
complainant that he would visit the first wife and children
who are residing in Sattur at Dharwad.
3.7. On 04.12.2025 at about 11.00 p.m., owner of
the house of the complainant informed over telephone that
her husband has fallen down in Sattur at Dharwad and he
has been shifted to KIMS Hospital. On 05.12.2025 at about
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
04.30 a.m., when complainant visited KIMS Hospital, she
noticed that her husband was no more.
3.8. It is her apprehension that on 04.12.2025
petitioners herein gave a life threat to her husband and
therefore, her husband consumed poison. There is also a
death note and a video clipping before his death and sought
for action against the petitioners herein.
4. After registering the case, police investigated the
matter. From the date of offence, petitioners are
absconding and the attempt made by the petitioners to
obtain an order of grant of anticipatory bail is turned down
by the learned District Judge. Thereafter, petitioners are
before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating
the grounds urged in the petition would contend that the
complaint averments are contradictory in nature, inasmuch
as, in one breath the complainant has stated that there was
no salary paid and at another breath, she would say that a
sum of Rs.10,00,000/- is parted away from the husband of
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
the complainant by the accused persons. When there was
no salary paid at all by the petitioners herein how could
they demand Rs.10,00,000/- from the husband of the
complainant, is a question which exposes the hollowness of
the prosecution case.
6. She would further contend that petitioners are
law abiding citizens and they would cooperate with the
Investigation Agency and thus, sought for grant of
anticipatory bail.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent-State reiterating the contents of the
objection statement would contend that from the date of
offence petitioners are not available for the investigation.
8. He would invite the attention of this Court about
the video clipping recorded by the deceased himself before
his death and also the death note which would prima facie
establish the threat given by the petitioners herein to the
deceased which ultimately resulted in deceased consuming
the poison.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
9. Therefore, custodial interrogation is utmost
necessary in the case on hand and thus, sought for
dismissal of petition.
10. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously.
11. On such perusal of the material on record, it is
crystal clear that acquaintance of the husband of the
complainant with the accused persons is not in dispute.
12. Admittedly, husband of the complainant has
worked with the petitioners herein for the year 2016 to
2019 as a driver. Further, specific averments are made that
the petitioners were indulged in black magic. What
transpired between the deceased and the petitioners during
the said work is to be investigated by the Investigation
Agency.
13. Admittedly, there is an allegation that a sum of
Rs.10,00,000/- was already parted away by the husband of
the complainant to the petitioners herein and there was a
further demand.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1475
HC-KAR
14. Contents of death Note and the video clipping are
to be taken note of and thereafter, the matter is to be
investigated by taking the petitioners into custody.
15. Therefore, prima facie materials available on
record as on today would indicate that there is a direct
nexus between the suicidal death of the husband of the
complainant and the petitioners herein.
16. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion
that petitioners have not made out any good grounds to
allow the anticipatory bail request.
17. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(V.SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
SMM, CT:CMU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 14
