[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Farman Pasha vs The State By S.H.O on 16 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
CRL.P No. 2891 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2891 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
1. FARMAN PASHA
S/O. SAIF PASHA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT VEERASAGARA,
NEAR AZAD MODERN SCHOOL,
TUMAKURU-572 101.
(NOW IN J.C.)
Digitally
signed by
SREEDHARAN
BANGALORE ...PETITIONER
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI (BY SRI. PURUSHOTHAMA H.E., ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
AND:
1. THE STATE BY S.H.O.
THILAK PARK POLICE STATION,
TUMAKURU,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
CRL.P No. 2891 of 2026
HC-KAR
REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP)
---
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.159/2025 OF THILAK PARK
POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS/U/S 118(1), 109(1) OF BNS,
2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF VI ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
CRL.P No. 2891 of 2026
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner, who is arraigned as sole accused, is before
this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime
No.159/2025 registered by the respondent-police for the
offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 109(1) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Brief facts of the case:
2. The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint came to
be registered by the granduncle of the victim stating that,
his nephew had performed the marriage of the victim to
Farman Pasha five years ago. The couple had two
children. Both the petitioner herein and Muskan Banu
were living in Veerasagara. There was a constant dispute
between the petitioner and his wife. Panchayath was
held between the couple and it was resolved. The
petitioner herein was suspecting the fidelity of the victim
and used to quarrel with her. On 13.12.2025, around
01.30 p.m., the complainant had received a message
stating that the victim had sustained injuries at the hands
of the petitioner and the petitioner had locked the door
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
HC-KAR
from outside and went away. Immediately, he went
there, broke open the door and saw that she was lying on
the floor in a pool of blood. Immediately, she was shifted
to the hospital. The Doctor advised them to take her to
M.S. Ramaiah Hospital. Thereafter, she was shifted to
the said hospital for her treatment. Hence, the complaint.
The respondent-police after conducting investigation,
submitted the charge sheet.
3. Heard Sri Purushothama H.E., learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. Anitha Girish N., learned High Court
Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is
that the petitioner is none other than the husband of the
victim. The victim used to talk on her phone
unnecessarily with another person and she was warned
many times that she should not talk with that person,
however, she continued the same without any changes or
mending her ways.
5. It is further submitted that, during the sudden
provocation, an assault had taken place, even though he
had no intention to commit murder of the victim. Hence,
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
HC-KAR
she had sustained injuries. Later, she was admitted to
the hospital. After obtaining treatment, she was
discharged from the hospital. She is out of danger. The
petitioner is having two children and injured wife and he
has to take care of them and also he has to take care of
his aged parents. He is the earning member of the family.
He may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable
conditions and the petitioner will abide the conditions
imposed by this Court. Making such submissions, learned
counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for
the respondent - State vehemently submitted that the
petitioner, being a husband, had assaulted mercilessly on
the vital parts of the body of the victim with a weapon
and caused severe bleeding injuries. She has survived on
the timely intervention of the elders and well-wishers. If
the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances
of committing similar offence and also there may be
chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses.
Hence, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
HC-KAR
such submissions, learned High Court Government
Pleader prays to reject the petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties,
perused the averments made in the complaint and charge
sheet, it appears from the record that the petitioner had
assaulted his wife on vital parts of the body and she had
sustained severe bleeding injuries. Later, she was
admitted to hospital and survived due to the timely
intervention of the elders. The alleged offence is neither
punishable with death nor imprisonment for life. The
petitioner is none other than the husband of the victim.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing
suitable conditions that would take care of the
apprehension of the prosecution.
8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged
on bail in Crime No.159/2025 of
respondent-police for the offences
NC: 2026:KHC:15474
HC-KAR
stated supra, on executing personal
bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with one
surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court.
(iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or
tamper the prosecution witnesses nor
hamper the proceedings of the Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the
Trial Court on all hearing dates without
fail.
(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any
criminal cases till disposal of the case.
In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions
as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file
necessary application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
