Sri Sujith Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITHA (BNSS), 2023 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL ON THE FILE PENDING BEFORE THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT OF MADIKERI, KODAGU DISTRICT IN CRIME NO.127/2025 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT - MADIKERI TOWN POLICE ON 13.12.2025 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 310(2),127(2),118(1) R/W SEC.3(5) OF BNS 2023 WHERE THE PETITIONER IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.3.

¶31

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

¶32

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶33

3 -

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

ORAL ORDER

¶37

The petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.3, is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.127/2025 registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 127(2), 118(1) r/w. Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶38

Brief facts of the case:

¶39

The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint came to be registered by Sri Mahadeva H.P. s/o Puttamadaiah, stating that he was the resident of Chamarajpet, Bengaluru and working in a automobile shop at J.C. Road, Bengaluru. One and a half month prior to lodging the complaint, he had received a call from Rachana stating that <Are you a Principal?=. He replied that <He was not the Principal.= Thereafter, the said Rachana had sent her number and intended to make friendship with him. Both the complainant and Rachana had exchanged their photos through WhatsApp.

¶40

It is further stated that on 20.11.2025, the complainant had received a WhatsApp message stating that accused No.1 was coming to Rajarajeswari Dental Hospital,

¶41

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

Bengaluru and asked the complainant to meet her. He went there and met her around 02.20 p.m. Then, he was requested to pay Rs.5,000/-, as she was suffering from financial crisis. Accordingly, he had paid the amount of Rs.5,000/- through GooglePay. In all, she had received Rs.10,000/- from the complainant.

¶44

On 12.12.2025, around about 8.00 a.m., Rachana had called him and asked him to go to Madikeri. He went to Madikeri and waiting for her call to go to her house. Around about 10.30 p.m., he was asked to come near Nakshatra Super Market, Madikeri. He went to the location of which he had received through WhatsApp. Accused No.1 took the complainant to her house and they were talking with each other. In the meantime, around about 11.45 p.m., the complainant had heard the sound of an autorickshaw. The persons who came in the autorickshaw entered inside the house. They were introduced as brother and mother of accused No.1.

¶45

The so-called brother of accused No.1 had sent both accused Nos.1 and 5 outside the house and called accused

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Nos.3 and 4 to the house. All the accused had confined the complainant in the room and assaulted, intimidated and insulted by making videograph of the bare body of the complainant. However, the complainant had managed to escape from the clutches of the accused and went to police station and lodged a complaint.

¶49

On the basis of the complaint, the respondent 3

¶50

Police have registered F.I.R. in Crime No.127/2025 for the aforesaid offences.

¶51

Heard Mr. Ravichandra S.N., learned counsel for the

¶52

petitioner and Mrs. Anitha Girish N., HCGP, for respondent - State.

¶53

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, as per the averments of the complaint, accused No.1 got acquainted with the complainant through facebook and received amount of Rs.10,000/- on two events. Dinesh who is said to be the brother of accused No.1 is arraigned as accused No.2 had stated that he had informed the present petitioner to go to the house of accused No.1.

¶54

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

It is further submitted that the allegations are made against the petitioner that he along with other accused had assaulted and extorted the amount and also humiliated the complainant. However, the averments of the complaint would indicate that the names of the petitioner and others were mentioned. When the complainant was not aware about the names of the petitioner and other, the manner in which the complainant has mentioned the name of the petitioner creates a doubt.

¶57

It is further submitted that no identification parade has taken place to identify the accused. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. He will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶58

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State vehemently submitted that the petitioner is a rowdy sheeter. There are as many as nine cases are pending against the petitioner. Since he is a rowdy sheeter and he is involved in many other others, it is not appropriate to

¶59

7 -

¶60

NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

grant him bail. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.

¶63

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint and other materials on record, it appears that the complainant had been to Madikere on receiving the invitation of accused No.1. It is stated that he had been humiliated, degraded and assaulted by the petitioner and others.

¶64

Be that as it may, the Investigating Officer has not conducted identification parade to prove that the present petitioner was involving in the said incident or not. Having considered the same, it is appropriate to grant him bail even though there are number of cases pending against the petitioner. It is needless to state that the petitioner was on bail in all the matters pending against him.

¶65

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶66

8 -

¶67

NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

ORDER

¶70

(i) This Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶71

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.127/2025 of respondent-police for the offences stated supra , on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶72

(iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

¶73

(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

¶74

(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.

¶75

NC: 2026:KHC:15980 CRL.P No. 1339 of 2026

¶76

9 -

¶77

HC-KAR

¶78

In case, if, the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.

¶79

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶80

BKM

Sri Sujith v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sujith 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

Farman Pasha Vs the State by S.H.O.

Rahul @ Kulla Vs State of Karnataka

Chandrashekar Vs State by Psi Ajjampura Police Station

Chandrappa Vs State of Karnataka

H R Shivakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Mahammad Fayaz B a Vs State by Karnataka by