Sri.Venkatesh @ Ledhu Vs the State of Karnataka

Digitally signed by AND: SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA THE STATE OF KARNATAKA LAKSHMI THROUGH SHESHADRIPURAM Location: High POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY Court of REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Karnataka HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560001.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SMT.ASMA KOUSE, ADDL.SPP)

¶16

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.128/2022 (PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED LXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY IN S.C.NO.346/2023) REGISTERED BY SHESHADRIPURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECDTIONS 201, 504, 506, 120-B, 109, 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 302 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4, 25(1B)(B) OF ARMS ACT.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.14 seeking for regular bail in Crime No.128/2022 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 504, 506, 120B, 109, 341, 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 4 and 25(1B)(B) of Arms Act, pending on the file of the learned LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in SC No.346/2023.

¶25

The case of the prosecution is that on 13.09.2022 around about 07.30 a.m., the complainant went to his shop. His son, Ganesh used to go to drop his

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

children around about 08.30 a.m. in the morning. After dropping of the children, he used to bring the breakfast to the complainant. On the said day, i.e., on 13.09.2022, his son did not bring breakfast even after 9:00 a.m. The complainant then called his daughter-in-law. In the meantime, Nagaraj, who is the friend of his son was also present and he informed the complainant that his son has been murdered by unknown persons.

¶29

On receiving the said information, he immediately rushed to Apollo Hospital and noticed the injuries sustained to his son. Suspecting the foul play of some miscreants, he lodged a complaint against five persons.

¶30

The respondent/police have registered a case

¶31

against all the five persons and started investigation. During investigation, other accused have also been arrayed as accused. In the said incident, there are as

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

many as four accused persons. After conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet.

¶36

The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has not committed any offence and he has not committed any offence. Initially complaint came to be registered against only five persons. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, the name of the present petitioner has been added only to bring him within the ambit of the murder case.

¶37

It is further submitted that the petitioner has

¶38

been in judicial custody for more than three years. Out of 57 witnesses, only few witnesses have been examined.

¶39

There is inordinate delay in conducting the trial. Therefore, the fundamental right to get speedy trial guaranteed under the Constitution has been violated. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. He will abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶41

5 -

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

in the event of his release on bail. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition.

¶44

Per contra , the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently submitted that the overt act attributed to the petitioner is clear, inasmuch as he assaulted the deceased with a long iron machete on his neck and caused grievous injuries. The other accused also assaulted him and caused injuries and subsequently, the said Ganesh succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. The manner in which the petitioner and others committed the murder indicates the gravity and seriousness of the offences. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submission, she prays to reject the petition.

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the averments made in the charge sheet. It appears from the record that initially the case was registered against four accused persons. Subsequently, at

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

the time of filing the charge sheet, the other accused were arrayed as accused in the charge sheet. Though the entire case is based on the evidence of eyewitnesses, the other similarly placed accused have already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. On perusal of averments of the charge sheet, I am of the considered opinion that the present petitioner is also standing on the same footing as that of other accused. Hence, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. He may be availed the benefit of parity. Having considered the said aspect, I proceed to pass the following.

¶49

ORDER

¶50

i) The petition is allowed.

¶51

ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.128/2022 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 504, 506, 120B, 109, 341, 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 4 and 25(1B) of Arms Act, pending on the file of the learned LXI Additional City Civil and

¶52

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:13880 CRL.P No. 13919 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in SC No.346/2023 on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

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.

¶59

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶60

UN/bkm

¶61

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Sri.Venkatesh @ Ledhu v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Venkatesh @ Ledhu 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

Jaffer Sadiq @ Thimma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Jagadish G Vs Smt Sapna M

Sri Muneesh @ Jogi Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammed Faraz @ Mental Faraz Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Jayappa Vs State of Karnataka

Pratheek H @ Prathik Vs the State of Karnataka