[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj Alias Basalingappa S/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 February, 2026
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
CRL.P No. 104702 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104702 OF 2025
(438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ @ BASALINGAPPA
S/O VEERUPAKSHAPPA MALAPUR
AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER,
R/O KELGER, HOSUR ONI,
NARENDER ROAD, HUBBALLI DHARWAD.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. L.S. SULLAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH SUB URBAN PS DHARWAD
R/BY HGP OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH.
...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed by
(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP)
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO
THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO 1 U/S 118(2), 189 (2), 352, 191
(2), 190, 191 (3) OF BNS ON THE FILE OF PRL CIVIL JUDGE (JR
DIV) AND JMFC COURT, DHAWAD AND DIRECT IO TO RELEASE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN
THE DHARWAD SUB-URBAN P.S. CR. NO. 164/2025, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
CRL.P No. 104702 of 2025
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 Sri. L. S. Sullad, learned counsel for
petitioner and Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent-State.
2. Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer:
"Therefore the petitioner submit that this
Hon'ble Court may pleased to grant anticipatory bail
to the Petitioner/Accused No.1 U/s 118(2), 352,
191(2), 190, 191(3) of BNS on the file of Prl. Civil
Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Dharwad, in the
interest of justice and equity and direct IO to release
Petitioner/Accused No.1 in the event of his arrest in
the Dharwad Sub-Urban PS Cr.No.164/2025, in the
interest of justice and equity.
Any other relief, the Hon'ble Court may grant in
the intent of justice and equity."
3. Facts in nutshell which are utmost necessary for
disposal of the present petition are as under:
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
4. A complaint came to be lodged with Dharwad
Sub-Urban Police Station by the injured in the KIMS
Hospital, Hubballi on 03.10.2025 at about 04.00 p.m.
5. Gist of the complaint averments would reveal
that the injured is an agriculturist and the accused is
residing in the same vicinity and used to pick up the quarrel
and harass the young children. In that regard, a complaint
was given to the mother of the petitioner to advise her
children properly.
5.1. On 02.10.2025 at about 10.30 p.m., when the
complainant and his sister Yashoda had been to invite the
relatives for the function and returning to the house, the
mother of the petitioner and wife of Manjunatha were
standing outside their house, they entered into conversation
with the complainant. At that juncture, they informed that
children of Chulkimath house had quarreled with the
children of the complainant and petitioner and others are
picking up the quarrel with everybody and therefore stern
advice be given to them.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
5.2. Being enraged with such a complaint, petitioner
herein went inside the house, picked up the sickle and came
out of the house and assaulted the complainant with the
sickle on his head 2-3 times and also abused him in filthy
language.
5.3. Another accused namely Manjunatha also
assaulted the complainant on his back by hand. As a result
of sudden block, the complainant fell down and at that
juncture, Mahesh, Akash and Sanju kicked him. The sister
of the complainant raised hue and cry seeking help.
Immediately, people who are in the vicinity arrived on the
spot and they pacified the quarrel and shifted the injured to
Dharwad District Hospital and thereafter he was shifted to
KIMS Hospital, Hubballi, for higher treatment.
6. Police on the basis of the said complaint,
registered the case in Crime No.164/2025 on 03.10.2025
for the offences punishable under Sections 118(2), 189(2),
352, 191(2), 191(3) read with Section 190 of Bharatiya
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
Nyaya Sanhita, 20231. The police by visiting KIMS Hospital
investigated the matter.
7. Petitioner is absconding from the day of incident
and he is not available to the Investigation Agency till
today.
8. Attempt made by the petitioner to obtain an
order of grant of anticipatory bail is turned down by the
learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, in
Criminal Miscellaneous No.466/2025. Thereafter, the
petitioner is before this Court.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the
grounds urged in the petition would contend that it is an
isolated incident and there is no previous complaint with
regard to the alleged torture to the young children by the
petitioner and incident has occurred at the spur of the
moment.
10. He would further contend that even according to
the Investigation Agency, the offence is one under Sections
For short, 'BNS, 2023'
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
118(2), 189(2), 352, 191(2), 191(3) read with Section 190
of BNS, 2023 and therefore, gravity of the offence is not so
high so as to deny the anticipatory bail request of the
petitioner.
11. He would further contend that there are no
criminal antecedents to the petitioner and therefore, sought
for grant of anticipatory bail.
12. He would further contend that the other accused
persons have been granted bail and therefore, on the
ground of parity present petitioner is entitled for an order of
grant of anticipatory bail.
13. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent-State opposes the bail grounds by
contending that when there was a request by the
complainant and his sister with the mother of the petitioner
to advise him properly as he is picking up quarrel with
young children in the vicinity, all of a sudden the petitioner
went inside the house, brought a sickle and assaulted the
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
complainant on his head, which clearly shows the gravity of
the offence against the petitioner.
14. He would also contend that mere non registration
of the earlier cases against the petitioner would not be
sufficient to consider the bail request. The petitioner is not
available for investigation on and from 02.10.2025, which
shows that he is not a law-abiding citizen.
15. Therefore, he would contend that the bail request
of the petitioner is to be rejected as custodial interrogation
is very much necessary, inasmuch as, recovery of sickle
used in the incident is to be recovered.
16. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously.
17. On such perusal of the material on record, it is to
be noted that the complainant and his sister had casually
visited their relatives' place for inviting a function and while
returning home, they met the mother and wife of another
accused Manjunatha, who were standing in front of their
house on 02.10.2025. Since the petitioner and his brothers
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
and others were torturing the young children, the
complainant did is he requested the mother of the petitioner
to advise the petitioner sternly as he is repeatedly harassing
the young children.
18. For such a genuine request, petitioner went to
the extent of assaulting the complainant with a sickle on his
head. Other accused also assaulted and kicked him when
the complainant fell down.
19. These aspects of the matter when viewed
cumulatively, it is crystal clear that it is voluntarily causing
a grievous hurt that too use of a sickle and part chosen for
assault is the head.
20. Anyway, these are the matters which are to be
investigated by the Investigation Officer and custodial
interrogation is also necessary taking note of the gravity of
the offence.
21. A genuine request ended in a criminal act by the
petitioner that too assaulting on the head with a sickle
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1561
HC-KAR
cannot be termed as a casual or an incident that has
occurred at the spur of the moment.
22. Moreover, the petitioner is not available to the
Investigation Agency on and from 02.10.2025, whereby
investigation has crippled to considerable extent and the
weapon used in the incident is not yet recovered on account
of non-availability of the petitioner.
23. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion
that the apprehension expressed by the prosecution is well
founded and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very
much necessary.
24. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(V.SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
SMM, CT:CMU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 6
