Sri Rohith C T., Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:26498 CRL.P No. 9533 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9533 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. ROHITH C.T. AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, S/O THIMMEGOWDA, R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDAN HOSAHALLI, RAMESHWARA POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 204.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MURALIDHARA T., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶14

(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.233/2025 REGISTERED BY THE NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES U/S 109(1), 74, 127(2) R/W 3(5) OF BNS 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NELAMANGALA.

¶17

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

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:26498 CRL.P No. 9533 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Accused no.1 in Crime No.233/2025 registered by Nelamangala Rural Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 74, 127(2), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶24

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶25

FIR in Crime No.233/2025 was registered by Nelamangala Rural Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner and another based on the first information dated 14.06.2025 submitted by Smt. Srivarsha - wife of accused no.2. During the course of investigation, petitioner who is the brother of accused no.2 was arrested on 15.06.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.1160/2025 was rejected on 30.06.2025.

¶26

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the marriage of the first informant with accused no.2 was a

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:26498 CRL.P No. 9533 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

love marriage. Petitioner herein is the younger brother of accused no.2. It appears that about 1 1/2 months prior to the registration of the FIR in the present case, first informant had received a message from an unknown number in her phone and she had informed her husband that the said message was received by her from Prema. Thereafter, there was a quarrel between the parties on 11.06.2025 and accused nos.1 & 2 allegedly after abusing the first informant had also assaulted her. It is further alleged that she was confined in a house and was assaulted for two days. It is in this background, she had filed a complaint before the police on 14.06.2025.

¶30

The wound certificate of the victim would go to show that she had suffered two injuries as a result of the alleged assault which are contusions and the said injuries are simple in nature. Petitioner who has no criminal antecedents, is in custody from 15.06.2025 onwards. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:

¶31

4 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:26498 CRL.P No. 9533 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.233/2025 registered by Nelamangala Rural Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 74, 127(2), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, subject to the following conditions:

¶35

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶36

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;

¶37

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

¶38

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

¶39

Sd /- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶40

KK

Sri Rohith C T., v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Rohith C T., 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

Naveena @ Jollu Vs State of Karnataka

Nanjegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Manoj N Vs State of Karnataka

Krishnegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Prakasha v Vs State by Mysuru South Ps

Sunil Alias Ningaraju Vs State of Karnataka