Sri Sharan @ Akash Bhavan Sharan Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10203 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. SHARAN @ AKASH BHAVAN SHARAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O LATE SADASHIVA POOJARY, R/AT DOOR NO.4-107, MANIKANTA NILAYA, ANAND NAGARA, AKASHA BAVANA, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. ARUN SHYAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUYOG HERELE E., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH MANGALURU SOUTH PS, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

(BY MS. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL. SPP)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT MANGALURU SOUTH P.S. TO RELEASE / ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO.4/2024 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT P.S. FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 353, 332, 307 OF IPC, 1860, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANGALURU.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner, sole accused in Crime No.4/2024 of Mangaluru South Police Station, in judicial custody from 09.01.2024, has preferred this petition to enlarge him on bail.

¶24

Learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the petition seeking bail, vide order dated 26.06.2025 passed in S.C.No.85/2024.

¶25

Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for

¶26

the petitioner, learned Addl. SPP for the State and perused the material on record.

¶27

Learned Addl. SPP has filed a detailed

¶28

statement of objections opposing the prayer for bail.

¶29

FIR is registered against the petitioner for the

¶30

offence punishable under Section 353, 332 and 307 of IPC,

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

on a complaint lodged by the PSI, City Crime Branch, Mangaluru City.

¶35

Chargesheet has been filed. Case is committed

¶36

and pending before the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in S.C.No.85/2024.

¶37

Petitioner is accused of obstructing the police personnel, when they tried to apprehend him and alleged to have attempted on the life of CW2 – Prakash (PC 3067).

¶38

The facts which are not in dispute are that the petitioner was an accused in S.C.No.152/2011, tried before the V Additional Sessions Court, Puttur. He was acquitted in the said case. Acquittal order was challenged by the State in Crl.A No.870/2017 before this Court. As he was convicted by this Court and also wanted in other criminal cases, the Police attached to CCB, Mangaluru went to apprehend him on 09.01.2024, on being tipped about his whereabouts. It is alleged that when the Police tried to apprehend him, he obstructed them from

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

discharging their duty and tried to assault the police with a knife and caused injuries to CW2 – Prakash, a Police Constable. The police opened fire, as self-defence, resulting in petitioner sustaining gunshot injuries to his leg. He was then taken to Father Muller’s Hospital in Mangaluru for treatment.

¶43

Learned Additional SPP has contended that petitioner is a notorious criminal, involved in as many as 25 criminal cases, out of which 12 cases are still pending. She contended that in the present case, there are 14 Police personnel who were present and witnessed the incident and in the event of grant of bail, there is eminent danger to the prosecution witnesses. She contended that petitioner is part of an organized criminal conspiracy, he is capable of destroying the evidence, influencing and threatening the witnesses and therefore, he is not entitled for bail. She further contended that the accused deliberately evaded arrest despite several arrest warrants issued against him and in the present case, when the

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Police surrounded him and ordered to surrender, he threatened them holding a knife and attempted on the life of one of the Police, causing bleeding injuries to his right shoulder. Hence, the Police resorted to the use of force and as a self-defence to protect themselves, opened fire, initially in the air and then on the leg of petitioner.

¶47

Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the entire allegations are false and the petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against him. He contended that the Police have registered a false case against him alleging that he has obstructed them from discharging their duties and tried to assault them etc. He contended that the Hon’ble Apex Court has allowed the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by this Court in Crl.A No.870/2017 and acquitted him in Crl.A No.3399/2024 vide judgment dated 09.05.2025. He further contended that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.01.2024, the injury allegedly sustained by CW2 is

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

simple in nature. He contended that all the witnesses are Police officials and therefore, question of tampering the evidence or witnesses will not arise, even otherwise the petitioner will undertake to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by the Court.

¶51

The case of the prosecution is that on 09.01.2024 at about 4.00 PM, when the police went to apprehend the petitioner, he obstructed them from discharging their duties and assaulted one of them with a knife and caused bleeding injuries to him. The police then opened fire to apprehend the petitioner and they were finally able to apprehend him. Petitioner was treated for the gunshot injuries sustained by him. He is in custody from 09.01.2024.

¶52

It is not in dispute that the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Hon’ble Apex Court challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by this Court, reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Court, has been allowed and petitioner has been

¶53

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

acquitted of the charges levelled against him in SC No.1232/2011. It is the contention of the State that several cases are registered against the petitioner and therefore, if he is released on bail, he may once again indulge in criminal activities and flee from Justice etc. The learned Senior counsel submits that among the cases registered against him, 15 cases are ended in either acquittal, discharge or quashing. It is further contended that the allegations made in the present case are entirely false and there being about 15 Police personnel present, it is difficult to believe that the petitioner tried to attack them etc.

¶56

Investigation is completed and chargesheet has been filed. 60 witnesses are cited in the chargesheet. The material witnesses are police officials. Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.01.2024. Charges are not yet framed. The conclusion of trial may take considerable time. The allegations that the petitioner has obstructed the Police and tried to attack on of them with a knife etc.,

¶57

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

is a matter which has to be established in a full fledged

¶60

trial. It is not in dispute that CW2 has sustained one simple injury. In that view of the matter, by imposing stringent conditions, petitioner can be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

(i) Petition is allowed .

¶63

(ii) Petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in S.C.No.85/2024 pending before the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, arising out of Crime No.4/2024 of Mangaluru South Police Station, subject to following conditions:

¶64

He shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶65

He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Court, if there is change in the address.

¶66

9 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC:37195 CRL.P No. 10203 of 2025

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

He shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶70

He shall mark his attendance in Mangaluru South Police Station on 1^st and 15^th of every month, till conclusion of the trial or until further orders.

¶71

He shall not indulge himself in committing any offence.

¶72

He shall appear before the trial Court on every date of hearing without fail.

¶73

Violation of any of the above condition shall result in

¶74

cancellation of bail.

¶75

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶76

HB/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Sri Sharan @ Akash Bhavan Sharan v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sharan @ Akash Bhavan Sharan v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Amith @ Amith Kumar Vs State by Women Police Tumakuru

Sri Harish S M Vs the State of Karnataka

Sheetal Sidram Sollapure Vs State by Cen Police

Avinash Shetty Vs State of Karnataka

Shakib @ Shabbu Vs State of Karnataka

Karthik @ Karu Vs State of Karnataka