Sri Arun @ Appu Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI ARUN @ APPU (AS PER IMPUGNED ORDER) APPU @ ARUN @ APPU @ OLE (AS PER CHARGE SHEET) S/O LATE GOVINDARAJ AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT NEAR MASIDI, MALLIKARJUNAPPA COLONY KALKERE VILLAGE JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE- 562 106.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI MANJUNATH M R, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

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

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANNERGHATTA POLICE STATION BENGALURU DISTRICT REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:40617 CRL.P No. 12315 of 2025

¶18

2 -

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.No.140/2025 REGISTERED BY BANNERGATTA P.S. BENGALURU FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 351(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND 109(1), OF BNS 2023 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE HON’BLE III ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C ANEKAL BENGALURU IN ITS C.C.No.5778/2025 THE III ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT SIT AT ANEKAL HAS REJECTED THE BAIL PETITION ON 12.08.2025 IN CRL.MISC.No.5376/2025 AND ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

This petition is filed by the petitioner -accused no. 1. Under Section 483 of BNSS, seeking grant of bail in Crime No.140/2025 of Bannergatta Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) and 109 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in C.C.No.5778/2025 on the file of III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal, Bengaluru.

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40617 CRL.P No. 12315 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner –

¶28

accused No.1 and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner –accused would contend that petitioner is in judicial custody since 27.05.2025 and as the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner –accused No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation. The injured has been discharged from the hospital. The assault is on the back of the injured and therefore it cannot be said that it is on the vital part of the body. With these he prayed to allow the petitioner and grant bail to the petitioner –accuse No.1.

¶30

Per contra learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State would contend that the knife has been recovered from the petitioner –accused No.1 under mahazar. The injury sustained by the petitioner is stated to be grievous in nature. C.W.3 to C.W.5 are eye witnesses to the incident. The charge sheet

¶31

4 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:40617 CRL.P No. 12315 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

materials show prima facie case against the petitioner. With these, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶35

Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶36

perused charge sheet records and other materials placed on records.

¶37

The accusation against the petitioner –accused

¶38

No.1 is that there was a quarrel between petitioner – accused No.1 and the injured. In that quarrel accused No.2 assaulted the injured with hands and kicked with the leg and at that time this petitioner -accused No.1 took a knife from his pocket and assaulted C.W.2 -injured on his back and caused bleeding injury. C.W.2 has sustained injury on his back and it is stated to be grievous in nature. The petitioner –accused No.1 is in judicial custody since 27.05.2025 and as charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further interrogation. The part on which injury has been caused by the petitioner –accused No.1 is back of C.W.2 and it is stated to be not a vital part which can

¶39

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40617 CRL.P No. 12315 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

cause death. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner –accused No.1 has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions.

¶42

In the result, the following

¶43

ORDER

¶44

i) The petition is allowed.

¶45

ii) The petitioner –accused No.1 is granted bail in Crime No.140/2025 of Bannergatta Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) and 109 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in C.C.No.5778/2025 on the file of III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal, Bengaluru subject to following conditions;

¶46

a. The petitioner –accused No.1 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;

¶47

6 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:40617 CRL.P No. 12315 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

b. The petitioner –accused No.1 shall not threaten or tamper prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly;

¶51

c. The petitioner –accused No.1 shall appear before the trial court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶54

DSP

¶55

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 CT.SM

Sri Arun @ Appu v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Arun @ Appu 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

Mohan @ P Mohan Vs State by

Mr Imran @ Mohammed Imran @ Sultan Vs State of Karnataka

Syed Asif Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Naveen M Vs State by Karnataka

Ganapathy P M Vs the State of Karnataka

Nihal B.R. Vs the State of Karnataka