logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 579 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Karnataka
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 8082 Of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Parties : Sagar Das Versus State Of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: S. Mahesh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Vinay Mahadevaiah, HCGP.
Date of Judgment : 03-08-2026
Head Note :-
Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC 40681,
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This Crl.P is filed u/S 439 Cr.PC (filed u/S 483 BNSS) praying to enlarge him on ball in C.C. No. 20643/2026 before the XXIV Addl. CJM Court, Bangalore arising out of Crime No.01/2026 of KP Agrahara Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) r/w 3(5) of BNS 2023.)

Oral Order

1. Accused No.1 in Crime No.1 of 2026 registered by Kempapura Agrara Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) R/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023 is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.1 of 2026 was registered by Kempapura Agrahara Police Station, Bengaluru, against unknown persons based on the first information, dated 01.01.2026 received from Sri Girish S, son of Siddaraju. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 01.01.2026 and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet is filed against three persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused no.1 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Criminal Misc.No.4711 of 2026 was rejected on 30.05.2026. Therefore, he is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that, the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. Case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and accused no.3 has been granted regular name by this Court in Criminal Petition No.9109 of 2026 disposed of on 29.07.2026. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition submits that, allegation of assaulting deceased with a weapon is found only as against accused no.1. Therefore, there cannot be any parity insofar as this petitioner is concerned. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. This Court in Criminal Petition No.9109 of 2026 has granted regular bail to accused No.3 and in paragraph nos.4, 5 and 6 of the said order it is observed as follows:-

          "4. FIR in the present case was registered against unknown persons after the dead body of deceased Rechanna was found. During the course of investigation, petitioner and other accused were arrested and after completing investigation, charge sheet is filed against them for the aforesaid offences.

          5. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that accused Nos.1 to 3 were staying in a rented premises adjacent to the house of CW2, in which she was staying with her son Rechanna. Since, the accused persons were creating nuisance after consuming alcohol, Rechanna had quarreled with them earlier. On 31.12.2025, CW2 had gone to her native place. Rechanna and his friend CW7 had consumed alcohol and thereafter returned home and after having food, CW7 had slept while Rechanna was sitting in the hall. At about 11.15 p.m., accused No.1 allegedly kicked the door of Rechanna's house and thereafter returned to his house. Subsequently Rechanna, who came out of his house, went to the house of accused persons and quarreled with them.

          6. In the incident that had taken place subsequently, accused Nos.2 and 3 allegedly had caught hold of Rechanna and instigated accused No.1 to commit his murder. Accused No.1, who brought a knife, allegedly had stabbed Rechanna with the same on his chest and other parts of the body and committed his murder. The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence".

7. Though there is an allegation in the charge sheet that it was the petitioner, who had assaulted the deceased with a knife, there is no direct evidence for the same. It is only based on the movement of the accused nos.1 to 3 which was found in the CCTV footage near the spot of crime, they were arrested and they allegedly had confessed to the crime.

Investigation of the case is now completed and charge sheet has been filed. Charge sheet allegations are required to be proved against the accused in a full-fledged trial. Undisputedly, petitioner has no criminal antecedents and is said to be the only earning member of his family. Under the circumstances, the following :-

ORDER

          Criminal petition is allowed.

          The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.1 of 2026 registered by Kempapura Agrara Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) R/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023, subject to the following conditions:-

          a) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum (Out of which one must be local surety), to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

          b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

          c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

          d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

          e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.
 
  CDJLawJournal