[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Mr.Bharanitharan vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 March, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:15946
CRL.P No. 16870 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.16870 OF 2025
(439(2)(Cr.PC)/483(3)(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
MR. BHARANITHARAN S/O. SETHU PONNUSWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT. B901, G.R RICHMOND PARK,
LAKE ROAD, GOTTIGERE, BENGALURU-560083.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ROHITH KASHYAP M.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HULIMAVU POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU-560083, REPRESENTED BY
ITS S.P.P. HIGH COURT BUILDING,
VISHAL BENGALURU-560001.
NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL 2. MR. SURESH BALAJI P,
Digitally signed by
S/O. PANNEER SELVAM,
VISHAL NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA R/AT. NO. 215, HPS COMPLEX,
DHARWAD BENCH
NOBEL RESIDENCY ROAD,
DODDA KAMMANAHALLI,
BENGALURU-560083.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. PRAVEEN C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.P.C (U/S
483(3) BNSS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE BAIL GRANTED TO
RESPONDENT NO.2/ACCUSED VIDE ORDER DATED 28.10.2025 IN
CRL.P.NO.10423/2025 AND DIRECT HIS IMMEDIATE ARREST AND
REMAND TO JUDICIAL CUSTODY; DIRECT A FRESH INQUIRY INTO
THE HANDLING OF DIGITAL EVIDENCE RECOVERED FROM THE
ACCUSED; AND ETC.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:15946
CRL.P No. 16870 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL 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 the complainant under Section
483 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS'
for short) praying to cancel the bail granted to respondent
No.2-accused vide order dated 28.10.2025 passed in Crl.P.
No.10423/2025 and direct him to surrender before the trial
Court.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent
No.1-State. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-accused is
absent.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend
that the petitioner is receiving several phone calls and one of
them is from one Varadarajan and he is the relative of
respondent No.2-accused, in that regard, the petitioner had
made a complaint and it is registered in NCR No.1618/2025
before the Hulimavu Police Station. The respondent No.2-
NC: 2026:KHC:15946
HC-KAR
accused is stated to have had physical relationship with
several other girls as reported in several news papers which
are produced at Annexure-B and they are reported on the
basis of the statements made by the Police officials. Hence, it
is submitted that there is more gravity of the offence alleged
against the respondent No.2-accused. The petitioner made
enquiry with the Police with regard to the said aspect and
Police told him that Police have not received any other
complaint from any other girls. He further submits that it is
a duty of the Police under Section 19 of the POCSO Act, to
intimate the jurisdictional Police or register a case in that
regard. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
4. The learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent No.1-State would contend that he has no
instructions regarding what is the further course of action in
NCR No.1618/2025.
5. Having heard the learned counsel and the
learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has
NC: 2026:KHC:15946
HC-KAR
perused the order granting bail to the respondent No.2-
accused and the other materials placed on record.
6. The bail granted can be cancelled for violation of
conditions imposed in the order. One of the conditions
imposed in the order dated 28.10.2025 is that, the accused
shall not temper the prosecution witnesses either directly, or
indirectly. It is alleged that one Varadarajan has made a
phone call to the petitioner asking him to withdraw the
complaint and the said Varadarajan is stated to be a relative
of respondent No.2-accused. In that regard, the petitioner
has made a complaint and it is registered in NCR
No.1618/2025 at Hulimavu Police Station. The said NCR is
registered on 29.11.2025, what is the investigation in the
said NCR or enquiry by the Police is not placed on record.
Whether the said conversation is related to respondent No.2-
accused is also not placed on record and what is the
conversation between the Varadarajan and petitioner which
is stated to have taken place for 19 minutes, is also not
placed on record. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said
that, the said Varadarajan is the relative of the respondent
NC: 2026:KHC:15946
HC-KAR
No.2-accused and at his instance he made a phone call to
the petitioner for withdrawing the complaint.
7. The paper cuttings produced at Annexure-B with
regard to the respondent No.2-accused as having physical
relationship with eight other girls and stated to have been
published at the instance of the Police, will not enhance the
gravity of the offence alleged against the respondent No.2-
accused as charge sheet filed is only pertaining to one victim
girl.
8. There is no violation of any of the conditions
imposed by this Court in the order dated 28.10.2025 passed
in Crl.P. No.10423/2025 and there are no grounds made out
for cancellation of bail. In the result, the petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
PJ/CT:VH
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 3
