Allowed

Suzanee @ Suzana @ Suzain v. the State

Karnataka HC21 Feb 2026CRL.P/17345/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court granted bail to a 24-year-old final year LL.B. student accused in a kidnapping and extortion conspiracy under BNS, NDPS, and KCOCA. The court held she was similarly placed to an accused already granted bail, noting no criminal antecedents and that she was not required for further interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to execution of bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, not tampering with witnesses, attending trials, and committing no further offences.

Suzanee @ Suzana @ Suzain Vs the State — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION No.17345/2025

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SUZANNE @ SUZANA @ SUZAIN D/O ANIF MOHAMMAD AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT No.204, 2^ND FLOOR COMFORT TOWER NEAR THAAMBOOLAM HOTEL OPP. KALPANA THEATER UDUPI – 576 101.

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI DILRAJ JUDE ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE STATE THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶12

… RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M M, HCGP)

¶14

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF Cr.P.C (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER FOR GRANT OF REGULAR BIAL TO THE PETITTIONER HEREIN IN CONNECTION WITH CR.No.53/2025 PERTAINING TO NELAMANGALA RURUAL P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 140(2), 3110(2), 311, 111, 61(2) OF BNS, UNDER SECTION 8(c), 22(c) of NDPS ACT, UNDER SECTION 66(c), 66(D) OF I.T ACT, 2000, UNDER SECTION 3(i)(ii), 3(3),3(4),3(5) OF KCOCA ACT.

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 17.02.2026, THIS DAY, SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR J , DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING;

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶18

CAV ORDER

¶19

This petition is filed by accused No.15 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.53/2025 of Nelamangala Rural Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 310(2), 311, 111, 61(2) of BNS, Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of NDPS Act, Section 66(C) and (D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 3(i)(ii), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5) of Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act (for short ‘KCOC Act’) pending in

¶20

¶21

Spl.C.No.1704/2025 on the file of Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶23

learned HCGP for respondent/State.

¶24

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that

¶25

accused No.14 who is similarly placed to that of this petitioner has been granted bail by the Special Court in Crl.Misc.No.3328/2025. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. The petitioner is a final year LLB student studying in KVG Law College, Sulya and if she is kept in judicial custody it will affect her educational career. The petitioner is a lady aged about 24 years. Earlier as per order dated 10.03.2025 the KCOCA was not involved against this petitioner. Subsequently, by order dated 22.07.2025 the KCOCA has been invoked against this petitioner. There are no criminal antecedents of this petitioner. The petitioner earlier has not

¶26

¶27

involved in commission of any offence within a period of 10 years prior to the alleged date of incident. The petitioner was the lover of accused No.2 and she met accused No.2 in the year 2021. Thereafter accused No.2 has married some other lady. The voluntary statement of this petitioner has been recorded. Except recovery of Rs.10,000/- at the instance of the mother of the petitioner there are no other circumstances against this petitioner. The statement of CW.1 has been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, wherein no role of this petitioner has been stated. The petitioner alleged to have threatened CW.1 over a video call to give money demanded by accused Nos.1 and 2 otherwise, they will finish him. On these grounds, he has prayed to allow the petition.

¶28

Per contra , learned HCGP for respondent/State would contend that the petitioner is a member of organized crime syndicate by name Garuda Gang. The petitioner has got Rs.50,000/- from accused No.2 as her share in the

¶29

¶30

amount extorted. Accused No.2 is a drug peddler and this petitioner is having love affair with accused No. 2. The petitioner is one of the accused in Crime No.35/2025, wherein accused No.2 is also one of the accused, wherein the allegation against accused No.2 in that case is that he dashed his car to the police and other cars in order to escape from the police. There is a seizure of Rs.10,000/- at the instance of the mother of this petitioner. The account of this petitioner has been used by accused No.2 and there is credit of several amounts in the bank account of this petitioner. Considering the charge sheet materials there is a prima-facie case against this petitioner for offences alleged against her. If the petitioner is granted bail there are chances of she threatening the prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this she prayed to reject the petition.

¶31

Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

¶32

¶33

As per charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is

¶34

that accused Nos.1 to 15 are members of organized crime syndicate by name ‘Team Garuda’ and accused Nos.1 to 11 conspired to kidnap CW.1. In furtherance of the said conspiracy on 24.01.2025, the accused persons kidnapped CW.1 and took him to different places and extorted money from him and demanded further money from CW.1. The accused persons totally extorted Rs.11,96,000/- from CW.1 and out of them Rs.11,83,626/- has been recovered at the instance of the accused persons. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 26.01.2025 at the instance of accused No.2 this petitioner/accused No.15 in a video call has threatened CW.1 to give money to the accused persons or otherwise they will kill him. The other accusation against this petitioner is that, at her instance, Rs.10,000/- has been seized and given by her mother out of Rs.50,000/- given by accused No.2 to her as her share.

¶35

¶36

There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

¶37

The petitioner is not involved in commission of offences previously i.e. within 10 years from the date of the present offence. Accused No.14, who is the lover of accused No.1, is also alleged to have threatened CW.1 over a video call to give money to accused persons as demanded by them or otherwise they will kill him. Considering the said aspect, the petitioner is similarly placed to that of accused No.14 who has been granted bail by the Special Court.

¶38

The petitioner is a lady, aged about 24 years and she is studying in KVG Law Collage, Sulya. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 14.08.2025 and as the charge sheet is filed, she is not required for further custodial interrogation.

¶39

Considering all above aspects, the petitioner has made out case for grant of bail with conditions. In the result, the following:

¶40

¶41

ORDER

¶42

Petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted bail in

¶43

Crime No.53/2025 of Nelamangala Rural Police Station,

¶44

pending in Spl.C.No.1704/2025 on the file of Principal City

¶45

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, subject to following conditions.

¶46

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bail bond for sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties

¶47

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶48

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.

¶49

(iii) Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶50

¶51

(iv) Petitioner shall not involve in commission of any offence. If the petitioner is found involved in commission of any offence, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner.

¶52

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶53

DKB Ct.sm

Suzanee @ Suzana @ Suzain v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suzanee @ Suzana @ Suzain v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreedhara @ Gombe Vs State by Koratagere Ps

Sri Amar Kumar R Vs State of Karnataka

Sandeep, Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Tahir Pasha @ Thahir Pasha Vs the State of Karnataka

Anshukumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Manohar S Vs State of Karnataka