Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/3624/2026 of PAVAN M N Vs STATE BY K R PETE RURAL P S on 23 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:22178 CRL.P No. 3624 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3624 OF 2026 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: PAVAN M N S/O NATESH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3624 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
PAVAN M N
S/O NATESH
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/AT MOSALEKOPPLU, MODUR,
MANDYA – 571 426.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIKYATH B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY K. R. PETE RURAL P S
REP BY SPP
Digitally
signed by
PAVITHRA
N
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE - 560 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY Ms. ASMA KOUSER., ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS)
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.3/2026 OF K.R.
PETE RURAL P.S FOR THE OFFENCS P/U/S 326(g), 109, 351(2), 352, 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CJ
(SR.DN) AND JMFC COURT, K.R.PETE MANDYA DISTRICT AT
CHIKKABALLAPURA.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner/accused No.7 is before this Court seeking grant of regular bail in Crime No.3/2026 of respondent- police for the offence under Sections 326(g), 109, 351(2), 352 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Brief facts of the case:
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.01.2026 at about 07.20 pm, when the complainant and others were working in the bar and restaurant, the accused No.1 came in a motorbike along with his friends, asked Nikhil to give a full bottle of whiskey free of cost. The said Nikhil replied that there was no provision to supply the liquor free of cost. At that time, the accused started abusing him in a filthy language and he took his mobile phone and called the uncle of the complainant who is stated to be the owner of the bar and restaurant. The said Nikhil was instructed to give liquor to accused No.1. On receiving the said information, the said Nikhil gave small bottles of liquor instead of one full bottle.
3. It is further stated that, the accused Nos.1 to 3 and others again came near the bar and restaurant and started
HC-KAR
hurling the glass bottles filled with petrol and lit the fire. After setting the fire, accused Nos.1 to 3 and others fled away from the spot on their motorcycles. Hence the complaint. The investigation is under progress.
4. Heard Sri. Vikyath B., learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Asma Kouser, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.
5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.7 and he was not present at the spot. No overt act made against him. Even though the allegations are made only against three persons, the petitioner has been arraigned as one of the accused.
6. The petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Mosalekoppalu, Mandya District. The petitioner will abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such
HC-KAR
submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.
7. Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent-State vehemently submitted that the manner in which the incident had occurred would indicate that the petitioner and others had intention to maintain the rowdy status in the area. They are all anti-social elements. The petitioner is also one of the associates. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of again committing the similar offences. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant any relief as prayed for till examination of the eyewitnesses. Making such submissions, learned Addl. SPP prays to reject the petition.
8. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the FIR, which would indicate that accused Nos.1 to 3 had committed offence as stated in the complaint. The complainant specifically stated about the participation of only three accused. The present petitioner is arrayed as accused No.7 and he has been implicated in this case on the strength of the co-accused in the remand implication. Having considered the said aspect, it is appropriate
HC-KAR
to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.
9. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed.
(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.3/2026 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 326(g), 109, 351(2), 352 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 with 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 indulge in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.
HC-KAR
In case, 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
NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23