Shivam Singh Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4218 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHIVAM SINGH, S/O VARUN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, NO.6, SUDIKSHA NILAYAM, 3RD FLOOR, ROOM NO.401, SIZZLE IT MEADOWS, PATTANDUR AGRAHARA, NEAR ITPL BACK GATE, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU - 560 066.

¶9

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

PERMANENT ADDRESS: NO.E/493, SWARNAJAYATHI NAGARA, NEW MADHUKAM ROAD, NO.06, NEAR DEVI MANTAP, RANCHI, JHARKAND - 834 001.

¶11

(BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE)

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY WHITEFIELD PS, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT BENGALURU - 01.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT.WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP)

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.182 OF 2021 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S.8(c), 20(ii)(c), 21(c), 22(C), 23(C) OF THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985 OF WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF VIII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU RURAL IN SPL.C.NO.168/2023.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Accused No.2 in Spl.C.No.168/2023 pending before

¶25

the Court of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.182/2021 registered by Whitefield Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(ii)(c), 21(c), 22(C), 23(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.PC seeking regular bail.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody in the present case for the last more than three years ten months. He has no other criminal antecedents. Out of the 15 charge sheet witnesses, only 3 charge sheet witnesses have been examined as on this day. Accordingly, he prays to allow this petition.

¶31

Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the

¶32

petition does not dispute the submission made by the

¶33

learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶34

Petitioner who was arrested in the present case on 03.09.2021 was subsequently produced before the Jurisdictional Court and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against six persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected and therefore, he had approached this Court in

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Crl.P.No.2804/2022 which was dismissed on merits on 09.06.2022. Thereafter, he had filed Crl.P.No.6261/2022 which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 12.09.2022. Subsequently, petitoner had filed Crl.P.No.8129/2023 which was dismissed on merits by the co-ordinate Bench

¶38

of this Court on 20.09.2023 and thereafter, petitioner had filed Crl.P.No.7069/2024 which was dismissed on merits by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 28.08.2024 with a liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court a fresh, if the trial is not concluded within six months. Subsequently, petitioner had filed bail application before the trial Court in S.C.No.168/2023 was rejected on 06.03.2025. Therefore, petitioner has approached this Court in this successive bail petition.

¶39

It is not in dispute that petitioner aged about 24 years has no other criminal antecedents and he is in custody for the last more than three years ten months. This Court while dismissing Crl.P.No.7069/2024 by order dated 28.08.2024, taking into consideration that petitioner

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

is in custody from 03.09.2021 onwards, had directed the trail Court to expedite the trial and dispose of the case on merits within an outer limit of six months from the date of order and the petitioner was given liberty to approach this Court, if the trial is not concluded within six months. Though, the aforesaid order in Crl.P.No.7069/2024 was passed on 28.08.2024, till date the trial in the case is not yet concluded.

¶43

It is brought to the notice of this Court that out of the 15 charge sheet witnesses, as on this day, prosecution has examined only 3 charge sheet witnesses. Therefore, the chances of the trial being completed and the case being disposed of on merits in the near soon is very remote.

¶44

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

¶45

JAVED GULAM NABI SHAIKH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER - 2024 SCC ONLINE

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

SC 1693 at paragraph No.19, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as follows:

¶50

" 19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the Court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime."

¶51

Under the circumstances, I am of the view that

¶52

without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively, solely considering the period of petitioner's incarceration. Accordingly, the following:-

¶53

ORDER

¶54

The petition is allowed .

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.No.168/2023 pending before the Court of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.182/2021 registered by Whitefield Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(ii)(c), 21(c), 22(C), 23(C) of the NDPS, subject to the following conditions:

¶59

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

¶60

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;

¶61

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

¶62

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:25786 CRL.P No. 4218 of 2025

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

d) The petitioner shall not involve in

¶65

similar offences in future;

¶66

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.

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶69

KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50

Shivam Singh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarthak Sharma Vs State of Karnataka

Selvamani S Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashrapul Sardar Vs State of Karnataka by

Augustine Dada Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath H B Vs State by Mandya Rural Police

Sri Madhu @ Madhukirana Vs the State of Karnataka