The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, has dismissed an anticipatory bail petition filed by three individuals accused of abetment of suicide under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The Court observed a prima facie direct nexus between the suicidal death of the victim and the petitioners, citing a death note and a video clipping left behind by the deceased.
The Single Judge Bench of Justice V. Srishananda heard the Criminal Petition No. 100036 of 2026, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The petitioners sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 0203/2025 registered at Vidyagiri Police Station, Dharwad, for offences punishable under Sections 108 (Abetment of suicide), 3(5) (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention), and 351(2) (Criminal intimidation) of the BNS, 2023.
Background of the Case
The case stems from a complaint lodged by Smt. Sudha, the wife of the deceased, Chennayya Nilajageri. According to the complaint, the deceased had worked as a driver for the petitioners—Shri Chandrakanth Ananda Kumbar @ Bhargav, Smt. Shweta, and Sri Suresh @ Suryakant Ananda Kumbar—between 2016 and 2019.
The complainant alleged that the petitioners had promised her husband a monthly salary of Rs. 25,000 but retained the amount, assuring him that they would provide a two-guntha plot with a constructed house in lieu of the accumulated salary. The complaint further contained specific allegations that the petitioners were indulged in “black magic.”
It was alleged that even after the deceased left the job due to non-payment of salary and fear of black magic, the petitioners continued to harass him. The complainant stated that the petitioners visited their house and demanded Rs. 10,00,000, which the deceased had allegedly saved. Frightened by the threats involving black magic, the deceased eventually opened a gift shop, but the petitioners reportedly visited the shop and continued their demands.
On December 3, 2025, the deceased left his house stating he was visiting his first wife and children in Sattur, Dharwad. On December 4, 2025, the complainant was informed that her husband had collapsed and was shifted to KIMS Hospital, where he succumbed on December 5, 2025. The prosecution alleges that the deceased consumed poison due to the life threats issued by the petitioners.
Arguments of the Parties
Smt. Bharathi G. Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioners, argued that the allegations in the complaint were contradictory. She contended that on one hand, the complainant alleged that the petitioners never paid the salary, and on the other hand, she claimed that the petitioners were demanding Rs. 10,00,000 from the deceased. The counsel argued, “When there was no salary paid at all by the petitioners herein how could they demand Rs. 10,00,000/- from the husband of the complainant, is a question which exposes the hollowness of the prosecution case.” She further submitted that the petitioners were law-abiding citizens ready to cooperate with the investigation.
Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) for the respondent-State, strongly opposed the plea. He submitted that the petitioners had been absconding since the date of the offence. The HCGP drew the Court’s attention to a death note and a video clipping recorded by the deceased prior to his death, which allegedly established the threat given by the petitioners. He argued that custodial interrogation was “utmost necessary” to investigate the matter.
Court’s Observations and Analysis
Justice V. Srishananda, after perusing the material on record, noted that the acquaintance between the deceased and the accused was not in dispute. The Court acknowledged the specific averments regarding the petitioners’ involvement in black magic and the financial disputes involving the retention of salary and the subsequent demand for money.
Addressing the evidentiary material, the Court observed:
“Contents of death Note and the video clipping are to be taken note of and thereafter, the matter is to be investigated by taking the petitioners into custody.”
The Bench further held that the materials currently available on record pointed to a connection between the accused and the suicide. The Court stated:
“Therefore, prima facie materials available on record as on today would indicate that there is a direct nexus between the suicidal death of the husband of the complainant and the petitioners herein.”
Decision
The High Court concluded that the petitioners had not made out any good grounds for the grant of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Case Details:
Case Title: Shri Chandrakanth Ananda Kumbar @ Bhargav & Others vs. State of Karnataka
Case Number: Criminal Petition No. 100036 of 2026
Coram: Justice V. Srishananda
