[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Shivakumar R @ Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 27 March, 2026
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
CRL.A No. 424 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 424 OF 2026 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
SHIVAKUMAR R @ KUMAR
S/O RAMESH D.
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION COMPUTER OPERATOR
IN VRL OFFICE.
R/AT BASAPURA ROAD,
LBS NAGARA,
BAMBOOBAZAR,
DAVANAGERE-577001.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed
by SUMA B N (BY SRI. DINESHKUMAR RAO K.,ADVOCATE AND
Location:
HIGH COURT MS. POOJA KATTIMANI., ADVOCATE)
OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY DAVANGERE RURAL POLICE STATION
DAVANAGERE-577001
(REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
BENGALURU 560 001)
2. MAHARUDRAPPA
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
CRL.A No. 424 of 2026
HC-KAR
S/O LATE. NAGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/AT GUMMANURU VILLAGE,
DAVANAGERE TALUK,
DAVANAGERE-577512.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VINAY MAHADEVAIAH., HCGP FOR R1;
MS. RAJESWARI R.R., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 18.02.2026 PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE IN CR.NO.46/2026 OF
DAVANAGERE RURAL POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE AND BE
PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND ENLARGE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL IN CR.NO.46/2026 OF DAVANAGERE
RURAL POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE, PENDING ON THE FILE
OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
DAVANAGERE (REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 115(2),
126(2), 108, 352 R/W 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND U/S 3(1)(s),
3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) (POA) OF SC AND ST ACT 1989.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is by accused No.1 being aggrieved by
the order dated 18.02.2026 passed in Davanagere Rural
Police Station Crime No.46/2026 on the file of the II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere,
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
rejecting the application filed under Section 483 of BNSS
2023, seeking relief of bail for the offences punishable
under Sections 115 (2), 126(2), 108, 352, read with
Section 3(5) of BNSS 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(2)(v-a), 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. A complaint dated 27.01.2026 came to be filed
by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant alleging that
his son Harish was married to one Saraswathi on
09.11.2025. That there were frequent quarrels between
them which were ignored initially as a normal course. That
on 23.01.2026, said Saraswathi had gone out on the
pretext of going to a Temple but did not return. A
complaint was lodged before the jurisdictional police on
25.01.2026. The police had summoned Harish,
complainant and his family members for conciliation.
During the conciliation, said Saraswathi had declined to
join the said Harish. Accordingly, complainant and Harish
returned home. That on 26.01.2026 at about 10.00 a.m.,
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
accused/appellant herein and others had abused Harish in
filthy language and in the name of his caste. He was even
assaulted which was witnessed by Srinivas, Basavaraj and
Parameshi. Accused had stated that he was in love with
his wife Saraswathi for over ten years. The said incident
was informed to the complainant by said Srinivas. Harish
thereafter confided with the complainant that it was not
possible for him to go to Davanagere as he was
threatened with dire consequences by the accused and
that he had decided to put to an end to his life. That the
complainant advised him that if he was not intending to
live with Saraswathi, a panchayat could be convened.
That on 26.01.2026 at about 7.00 p.m., Harish had sent a
text message through Whatsapp to his sister Shivakumari
who had informed the complainant and expressed
apprehension of he taking extreme step. Being
apprehensive of his safety, complainant and others
searched for his whereabouts. At about 7.15 p.m., one
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
Vasantha had informed the complainant that his son
Harish hanged himself near his field.
3. Thus alleging that Saraswathi, Kumara, the
appellant herein Ganeshappa and Anjanamma being
responsible for his death, action was sought to be taken
against them. Based on the said complaint the case was
registered in Cr.No.46/2026 for the offences noted herein
above.
4. Accused/appellant was arrested on 29.01.2026.
Charge sheet has not been filed till date. The trial Court
has rejected the bail application on the premise of there is
likelihood of accused absconding and also possibility of he
interfering with the investigation and tampering with the
prosecution witnesses.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is working as a Computer Operator at VRL
Office in Davangere and he hails from a respected family
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
owning landed properties and there is no likelihood of he
fleeing the place. He further submits that the complaint
does not disclose any material, much less the prima facie
material, warranting implication of the accused/appellant
herein for the offences punishable as noted above, more
particularly under Section 108 of BNS 2023. He also
submits that the complaint also does not disclose
commission of offence punishable under Section 3(r)(s)
and (v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, as there is no indication of
he using any specific term referring to the caste of the
deceased. Therefore, he submits that the appellant is
entitled to be released on bail. He submits that appellant is
ready and willing to abide by any condition that may be
imposed by this Court.
6. Learned HCGP on the other hand submits that
on the very same day, another case in Cr.No.47/2026 has
been registered apparently on accused threatening one
Rudresh, maternal uncle of Harish, he having committed
suicide, apparently on the threat exerted by the accused
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
herein. He further submits that if the accused is enlarged
on bail, there is likelihood of he interfering in the
investigation process.
7. Smt.Rajeswari.R.R learned counsel appearing
for the defacto-complainant, on the other hand, opposing
the grant of bail, submits that it is only due to the threat
exerted by the accused/appellant, two innocent lives have
gone. There is a prima facie material regarding accused
being cause of their deaths and opposes for release of the
accused.
8. Heard. Perused the records.
9. The Apex Court in the case of M.ARJUNAN VS.
STATE reported in (2019) 3 SCC 315, while expounding
the ingredients of Section 306 of IPC, has held as under:
"7. The essential ingredients of the offence under
Section 306 I.P.C. are: (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention
of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to
commit suicide. The act of the accused, however,
insulting the deceased by using abusive language will not,
by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide. There
should be evidence capable of suggesting that the
accused intended by such act to instigate the deceased to
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of instigation/
abetment to commit suicide are satisfied, accused cannot
be convicted under Section 306 I.P.C."
10. The Apex Court in the case of PATEL
BABUBHAI MANOHARDAS AND OTHERS VS. STATE
OF GUJARAT, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine 503 at paras
16 and 18, has held as under:
"16. Therefore, the crucial word in Section 306 IPC
is 'abets'. 'Abetment' is defined in Section 107 of IPC. As
per Section 107 1PC, a person would be abetting the
doing of a thing if he instigates any person to do that
thing or if he encourages with one or more person or
persons in any conspiracy for doing that thing or if he
intentionally aids by any act or illegal omission doing of
that thing. There are two explanations to Section 107. As
per Explanation 1, even if a person by way of wilful
misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact which
he is otherwise bound to disclose voluntarily causes or
procures or attempts to cause or procure a thing to be
done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2 clarifies that whoever does anything in
order to facilitate the commission of an act, either prior to
or at the time of commission of the act, is said to aid the
doing of that act.
18. In Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, this Court
held that to 'instigate' means to goad, urge, provoke,
incite encourage to do 'an act'. To satisfy the requirement
of 'instigation', it is not necessary that actual words must
be used to that effect or that the words or act should
necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the
consequence. Where the accused by his act or omission
or by his continued course of conduct creates a situation
that the deceased is left with no other option except to
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
commit suicide, then 'instigation' may be inferred. A word
uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the
consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be
'instigation'."
11. Viewed in the light of the aforesaid principles of
law, the allegations made in the complaint, as noted
above, indicate that there have been frequent quarrels
between the deceased and wife resulting in Panchayat
being convened. The wife of the deceased had gone out
without informing which eventually led to filing of police
complaint. It is on record that during conciliation wife of
deceased had refused to join the matrimonial home.
Deceased was allegedly abused and assaulted by the
accused/appellant on 26.01.2026 at about 10.30 a.m.
which was witnessed by Srinivas and Rudrappa.
12. The deceased Harish had thereafter informed
his father of he not being able to go to Davanagere and
being humiliated intended to commit suicide. The
complainant had apparently advised him that if the
deceased did not want his wife Saraswathi, Panchayat
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
would be arranged. It is thereafter in the evening at 7.00
p.m. deceased purported to have sent a death note on
whatsapp to his sister. Deceased was subsequently found
hanging in his field.
13. The contents of the complaint do not indicate
accused having instigated or provoked, incited or
encouraged the deceased in committing suicide. Whether
refusal of the wife to join the deceased being the reason or
the threat by the accused/appellant to be the reason for
he committing the act of suicide is yet to be ascertained.
14. Further as regards ingredients to constitute the
offence under Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the 1989 Act,
there is no specific averment in the complaint of accused
using any specific terms in the name of the caste.
15. Accused is stated to be permanent resident
owning landed properties. He is under confinement since
27.01.2026. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
appellant has made out a prima facie case for grant of
bail.
16. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
1. Criminal appeal is allowed;
2. The impugned order dated 18.02.2026 passed in
Cr.No.46/2026 by the II Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Davanagere, is set aside.
3. The accused/appellant is enlarged on bail for offences
punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 108, 352 r/w
Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v-a), 3(2)(V) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 subject to the following conditions;
(a) Accused/ Appellant shall execute personal bond
for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the
likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(b) Accused/ Appellant shall appear before the
jurisdictional police every Sunday between 10.00
a.m. and 6.00 p.m.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:17473
HC-KAR
(c) Accused/ Appellant shall appear regularly on all
the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the
Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;
(d) Accused/ Appellant shall not directly or indirectly
threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;
(e) Accused/ Appellant shall not involve in similar
offences in future;
(f) Accused/ Appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction
of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court
until the case registered against him is disposed off.
(g) Communicate copy of this order to the trial Court
and concerned Prison authorities forthwith.
SD/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
SA/DS
