CRL.P/14818/2026 of SUPRITH RAJU H.M. @ KARTHIK Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 6 October 2026

ORAL ORDER

Accused No.1 in Crime No.158/2026 registered by Kirugavalu Police Station, Mandya District for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 74, 352, 329(3), 54 read with Section 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The FIR in crime No.158/2026 was registered by Kirugavalu Police Station, Mandya for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner herein, based on the first information

HC-KAR

dated 23.08.2026 received from S.Madaiah, who is the grandfather of the victim girl, aged 19 years. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioner had filed Crl.Misc.No.835/2026 before the learned Sessions Judge, Mandya, which was rejected on 19.09.2026. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. In the first information submitted by the grandfather of the victim girl, aged 19 years, it is alleged that the petitioner had certain private videos of the victim girl and had threatened the victim girl and her family members of circulating the same on social media. Subsequently, he had also demanded that the victim girl should marry him. After the engagement ceremony of the victim girl was performed with another boy, the petitioner had allegedly forwarded the private video of the victim girl to the said boy and thereafter, had also entered the house of the victim girl and after abusing her, had allegedly assaulted her with his hands. It is under these circumstances, FIR was registered against the petitioner and his family members.

HC-KAR

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of his arguments, has brought to the notice of this Court that, considering the allegations found against the petitioner and also his medical conditions, he was granted interim bail for a limited period by the learned Sessions Judge and subsequently, he had appeared before the Investigating Officer and had co-operated for the investigation. He has also submitted that mobile phone of the petitioner has been handed over by him to the Investigating Officer. The said submission is not disputed by the learned High Court Government Pleader.

6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents and he has undertaken to cooperate for further investigation. The alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and are punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETRE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. reported in 2011(1) SCC 694, in para No.89, has observed as follows:

HC-KAR

"89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. In cases where the court is of the considered view that the accused has joined investigation and he is fully cooperating with the investigating agency and is not likely to abscond, in that event, custodial interrogation should be avoided."

8. Considering the nature of allegations found against the petitioner, and since he has already co-operated with the police for the purpose of investigation, the following:

O R D E R

(i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

(ii) The respondent - Police or any other police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.158/2026 registered by Kirugavalu Police Station, Mandya District for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 74, 352, 329(3), 54 read with Section 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, subject to the following conditions:

1. The Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of

HC-KAR

receipt of the copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.

2. Petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.

3. Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he shall co-operate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon.

4. The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

5. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

SSB