Sri Sendil Kumar @ Sendhil Vs State of Karnataka

SRI SENDIL KUMAR @ SENDHIL S/O LATE SELVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, PREMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO.12 3^RD CROSS, ANADPURA, T.C. PALYA POST, K.R.PURA, BENGALURU - 560 036.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY K R PURA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA , BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B., ADDITIONAL SPP SRI.SAMPREETH V., ADVOCATE FOR DEFACTO COMPLAINANT)

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶20

2 -

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.941/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.159/2025 OF K.R. PURAM POLICE STATION) REGISTEREDF OR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1), 61(2), 238 AND 3(5) OF BNS 2023.

¶23

IN CRL.P NO. 12894/2025

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

SRI JAGATHGURU @ GURU S/O D. S. PARAMASHIVAM, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO. 12, PERUMAL KOIL STREET (BAJANAI KOIL STREET), 89, VEPPAMPATTU VILLAGE AND POST, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU - 602 001.

¶26

...PETITIONER

¶27

(BY SRI. TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY K R PURA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ,HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶30

...RESPONDENT

¶31

(BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B., ADDITIONAL SPP SRI.SAMPREETH V., ADVOCATE FOR DEFACTO COMPLAINANT)

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.941/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.159/2025 OF K.R. PURAM POLICE STATION) REGISTEREDF OR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1), 61(2), 238 AND 3(5) OF BNS 2023.

¶35

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

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

Criminal Petition No.11984/2025 is filed by accused No.1 and Criminal Petition No.12894/2025 is filed by accused No.2 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in Crime No.159/2025 of K.R.Puram Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 238 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in S.C.No.941/2025 pending on the file of XLV Additional City

¶39

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for respondent - State who is assisted by learned counsel for defacto complainant.

¶43

Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner would contend that, there was a sale transaction between accused No.1 and the deceased and sale deed has been registered. Subsequently from the loan account of accused No.1, consideration has been passed to the deceased. With regard to the balance amount, there was a dispute and in furtherance of the same, accused No.1 stated to have conspired with accused No.2 to kill the deceased. The case of the prosecution is based on statement of eyewitness i.e., C.W.5 whose statement has been recorded after two months of the incident. The iron rod recovered at the instance of accused No.2 does not contain any blood stains. There is a recovery of CCTV footages of Briju Vision Shop and K.R.Inn Lodge. The timings in the said CCTV footage do not match with the

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

said case of the prosecution. The money transaction between accused No.1 to accused No.2 and accused No.2 to accused No.1 was due to their friendship as they worked in the army and there are no call records between accused No.1 and accused No.2 after 20.02.2025. Considering all these aspects, the case is more based on the circumstantial evidence. The said circumstances have to be established at trial. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are not required for custodial interrogation. With these, he prayed to allow the petitions.

¶47

Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor who is assisted by learned counsel for defacto complainant would contend that, C.W.5 is an eye witness who has seen the deceased, accused Nos.1 and 2 in a car and their clothes were blood stained and at that time, accused No.2 has shown iron rod which was blood stained to C.W.5 and threatened him. There is a dispute regarding the site property and accused No.1 has given supari to

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

accused No.2 to kill the deceased. There is a transfer of money from the account of accused No.1 to the account of accused No.2 through RTGS. Subsequent to the incident, C.W.13 and C.W.18 have seen accused persons with the deceased on the date of incident. Considering all these aspects, there is a prima-facie case against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences alleged against them. If the petitioners are granted bail, there are chances of threatening the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. With these, she prayed for dismissal of the petitions.

¶51

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court has perused the FIR, charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

¶52

Accused No.1 is a relative of deceased and he

¶53

had purchased site property of the deceased and in that regard, Sale Deed has been executed on 18.02.2025. Subsequently, on 19.02.2025, there is a transfer of

¶54

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

amount of Rs.25,26,453/- from the loan account of accused No.1 to the account of deceased. It is alleged that accused No.1 took two blank cheques from the deceased and withdrawn the amount and transferred Rs.18,00,000/to the account of complainant. With regard to the balance

¶57

payment of Rs.22,00,000/-, when C.W.1 to C.W.3 and deceased insisted the accused No.1 to pay balance amount or otherwise they will cancel the Sale deed, accused No.1 stated to have conspired with accused No.2 to kill the deceased. C.W.5 is stated to be eye witness to the said incident which has taken place on 22.02.2025 and the statement of C.W.5 is recorded on 25.04.2025. The said statement is recorded after two months of the said incident.

¶58

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners would contend that, C.W.5 who is stated to be the eye witness, is an afterthought and created and he is not a witness to the

¶59

incident. There are other circumstances regarding movement of accused No.1. with the deceased on the date

¶60

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

of incident recorded in the CCTV footage, call records between accused Nos.1 and 2, transfer of money from the account of accused No.1 to accused No.2 or other circumstances which are required to be established at trial. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2. The apprehension of the prosecution that, if the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are granted bail, there are chances of threatening the complainant and other prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. In the result, I pass the following:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

Both Criminal Petitions are allowed . The

¶65

petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are granted bail in Crime No.159/2025 of K.R.Puram Police Station (pending in pending in S.C.No.941/2025 pending on the file of XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru) and

¶66

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:41743 CRL.P No. 11984 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 12894 of 2025

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

are ordered to be released on bail, subject to following

¶69

conditions:

¶70

i) The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶71

ii) The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.

¶72

iii) The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted by the Court and cooperate for the speedy disposal of the case.

¶73

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶74

KLV

¶75

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Sri Sendil Kumar @ Sendhil v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sendil Kumar @ Sendhil v. 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

Liyaqath Ali @ Holaluliyaqath Ali Vs State of Karnataka

Vinod Gowda D @ Vinod Vs State of Karnataka

Vinod Kumar G Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Farida Begum Vs State of Karnataka

Thangamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Sangameshwara Vs State by