Dismissed¶¶56

Manjunatha. G. K. v. the State by Holalkere Police

Karnataka HC3 Nov 2025CRL.A/2025/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025 (u/s 14(A)(2) SC/ST POA Act), decided 03.11.2025 by G Basavaraja J. Appeal by Manjunatha G.K. against rejection of bail (s.483 BNSS) in Spl.C(SC/ST) No.23/2025, Chitradurga; charges: s.103(1) BNS 2023 (murder) and s.3(2)(v) SC/ST (POA) Act; Crime No.113/2025, Holalkere P.S.; complainant Gowramma. Case based on circumstantial evidence (voluntary statement, mobile recovery, call details); bail refused — offence heinous, punishable with death or life imprisonment, release would affect society at large. Appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Though the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, it is not just and proper to release the accused on bail because the alleged offences are heinous in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. ¶8

Manjunatha. G. K. Vs the State by Holalkere… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2025 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MANJUNATHA G. K. S/O. KUBERAPPA, AGED 24 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/AT KODAGAVALLI VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577526 (NOW JUDICIAL CUSTODY)

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. S G RAJENDRA REDDY., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE STATE BY HOLALKERE POLICE CHITRADURGA DISTRICT RPTD. BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001.

¶13

GOWRAMMA W/O. LATE. DEVENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RAMAGHATTA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577526.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP. FOR R1, R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRL.A AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.09.2025 PASSED BY THE SPL, 2^ND ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA IN SPL.C (SC/ST) NO.23/2025 AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN CR.NO.113/2025 OF HOLALKERE P.S. CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF SPL, 2^ND ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA IN SPL.C (SC/ST)NO.23/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 103(1) OF BNS AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1986.

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

The appellant/accused has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the Special II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga in Spl.C(SC/ST) No.23/2025 dated 09.09.2025.

¶24

Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The a ppellant has filed application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 and the same came to

¶25

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

be rejected. Being aggrieved by this order, the appellant/accused has preferred this appeal.

¶29

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused/appellant would submit that, the appellant has been falsely implicated by the complainant and other interested persons who have disposed towards the appellant. There is an abnormal delay in lodging the complaint. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The appellant was implicated in this case only on the basis of voluntary statement and call details. There are no other incriminating circumstances in the said case. The appellant and the deceased were in illicit relationship for over a period of time and there is nothing unnatural that the appellant was in contact with the deceased. The lone circumstance, i.e., call details itself is not sufficient to prove the case based on circumstantial evidence.

¶30

The police have already submitted the charge sheet against the accused. Now the accused is in judicial custody. He is not required for further investigation. The

¶31

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

appellant/accused is ready to abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court and hence, sought for allowing this appeal.

¶34

As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.B.Lakshman submits that the prosecution has placed sufficient materials to show that the accused has committed the murder of the deceased with motive and intention. The trial Court has properly appreciated the materials on record in accordance with law and facts and there are no materials to interfere with the impugned order passed by the trial Court and sought for dismissal of this appeal.

¶35

I have examined the materials placed before this Court. On the basis of the complaint filed by one Gowramma, Holalkere Police have registered the case in Crime No. 113/2025 against unknown culprit. After the investigation, Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In Column No.17 of the charge sheet reads as under:

¶40

"ºÉÆ¼À¯ÉÌgÉ vÁ®ÆèPï PÉÆzÀUÀªÀ½î UÁæªÀÄzÀ zÉÆÃµÁgÉÆÃ¥ÀuÁ ¥ÀnÖ PÀæ.¸ÀA.12gÀ°è PÀAqÀ °AUÁ¬ÄvÀ d£ÁAUÀzÀ D¥Á¢vÀ£ÀÄ, £ÁAiÀÄPÀ ಜ�ಾಂಗ�ೆ� �ೇ�ದ �ಾ� 01 ರವರ ಮಗ�ಾದ ಮೃ�ೆ

¶41

� . ಆ�ಾ ರವ�ೊಂ��ೆ ಹಣದ ವ�ವ�ಾರ ಮತು! ಆಕ#ಮ ಸಂಬಂದ �ೊಂ�ದು& , ಮೃತ ಆ�ಾ¼ÀÄ ಆ'ಾ�ತ(�ೆ ಈ *ಂ+ೆ 10.000/- ರೂ.ಗಳನು/ �ೈಗಡ �ೊಟ3 ಹಣವನು/ 4ಾಪಸು �ೇ6ದ&�ೆ� ಅ'ಾ�ತನು ಇವಳ9 ಬದು:ದ&�ೆ �ಾ�ೆ ಪ+ೆ ಪ+ೆ ಹಣ �ೇಳ9�ಾ!�ೆ �ಾ;<ದ�ೆ ಪ=ನಃ ಹಣ �ೇಳ9ವ=�ಲ@ ಅಂ�ಾ �ೊAೆ Bಾಡುವ ಉ+ೆ&ೕಶ�ಂದ ಮೃತಳ9 �ಾಯಕ ಜ�ಾಂಗ�ೆ� �ೇ�zÁÝ¼É CAvÁ �ೊF!ದ&ರೂ ಸಹ ��ಾಂಕ :14.04.2025 ರಂದು �ಾF# ಸು. 8.00 ಗಂGೆಯ°è ಆ�ಾ ರವರನು/ ತನ/ ಊ�ಾದ �ೊಳAೆ��ೆ vÁ®ÆèPï gÁಮಘಟ3 �ಾ#ಮ�ಂದ ಹಣವನು/ �ೊಡು�ೆ!ೕ�ೆ Jಾ ಎಂದು �ೇ6 ಆ'ಾ�ತನು JೈL ನಂ :- �ೆಎ -16-EX-3124 �ೇ Jೈ:ನ°è ಕೂ�<�ೊಂಡು ಆ+ೆ �ನ �ಾF# 8.00 ಗಂGೆ;ಂದ �ಾF# 9.00 ಗಂGೆ ಮಧ�ದN@ �ೊಳAೆ��ೆ vÁ®ÆèPï �ೆಂಗುಂGೆ ಮತು! +ಾ<ಕGೆ3 �ಾ#ಮಗಳ ಮಧ�ದNರುವ (ಜOನ ಪ#+ೇಶ4ಾದ Pಾನು4ಾರು �ೋBಾಳ Pಾಗ�ೆ� ಕ�ೆದು�ೊಂಡು �ೋQ ಆ'ಾ�ತನು ಆ�ಾಳನು/ �ೊAೆ Bಾಡುವ ಉ+ೆ&ೕಶ�ಂದ ಎರಡು ಕಲುಗ6ಂದ ಅವಳ ತAೆ�ೆ ಬಲ4ಾQ �ೊRೆದು ರಕ!�ಾಯಪ�< �ೊAೆ Bಾ�ರು�ಾ!�ೆಂ�ಾ ತ(Sೆ;ಂದ �ೊರಪಟ3 ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ D¥Á¢vÀ£À «gÀÄzÀÝ PÀ®A 103(1) ©.J£ï.J¸ï 2023 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ®A 3(2)(v) ºÉÆ¼À¯ÉÌgÉ J¸ï¹/J¸ïn PÁAiÉÄÝ 1989 jÃvÁå F zÉÆÃµÁgÉÆÃ¥ÀuÁ ¥ÀnÖ".

¶42

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

The entire case is based on circumstantial

¶45

evidence. After arrest of the accused, police have interrogated the accused and recorded his voluntary statement. On the basis of voluntary statement

¶46

Investigating Officer recovered the mobile and has also collected call details. The investigating Officer has recorded the further statement of the complainant Gowramma, recorded the statements of the witnesses Sharadamma W/o Nagaraju, Ajjayya S/o Late Manjappa, Rangamma W/o Manjappa, Nagaraj.B.M S/o Late Manjappa, Lohitappa @ M.G.Lohitkumar S/o Late

¶47

Govindappa and Nayana.M W/o Santhosh K.S.

¶48

On perusal of these materials placed before this Court, I am of the opinion that that though the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, it is not just and proper to release the accused on bail as the alleged

¶49

offences are heinous in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. At this stage, if the accused is

¶50

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:44374 CRL.A No. 2025 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

released on bail it will affect the society at large. Hence, I

¶54

proceed to pass the following:

¶55