Sri Somesha C.G Vs State of Karnataka

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GOWRIBIDANUR RURAL POLICE STATION CHIKKABALLAPUR REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI. M R PATIL, HCGP)

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2026:KHC:6175 CRL.P No. 17413 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON REGULAR BAIL IN SC.NO.81/2025 IN CR.NO.148/2025 OF GOWRIBIDANUR RURAL P.S., CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT (RESPONDENT HEREIN) ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1), 109(1) READ WITH 3(5) OF BNS, 2023.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in SC No.81/2025 (Crime No.148/2025 of Gowribidanur Rural Police Station, Chikkabalapura) pending on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura registered for offences under Sections 103(1), 109(1) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and

¶29

learned High Court Government Pleader for

¶30

respondent/State.

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:6175 CRL.P No. 17413 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner would

¶34

contend that the accusation against this petitioner/accused No.2, as reflected in Column No.17 of the charge sheet, is that he assaulted CW1 with a sickle on his back, causing a simple injury, further assaulted CW1 with a club causing injury, and also assaulted CW2, thereby causing injuries to his right hand and little finger. The injuries sustained by CW1 and CW2 are simple in nature and not on vital parts. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.05.2025 and as charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

¶35

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State would contend that CW1 and CW2 are injured persons and CW3 is the eyewitness to the incident. The petitioner has assaulted with sickle on the back of CW1, caused severe injury, and also assaulted CW1 with club on his body, and assaulted CW2 and caused

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:6175 CRL.P No. 17413 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

injury to his right little finger. The charge sheet and other materials show a prima facie case against the accused No.2 for the offence alleged against him. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

¶40

Having heard the learned counsel, the Court

¶41

has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

¶42

As per the charge sheet, the case of

¶43

prosecution is that on 14.05.2025 at about 3.00 p.m., when CW1 went to his land to supply water to the crops, accused Nos. 1 and 2 restrained him by stating that they would not allow the supply of water to the crops. Thereafter, CW1 started working in his land. At about 05.30 p.m. CW2 and the deceased/Gangaraju came inside the land and asked accused Nos.1 and 2 why they are not allowing CW1 to supply water to the crops. At that time, accused No.1 assaulted the said Gangaraju with sickle on his left thigh and caused his death. At that time,

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:6175 CRL.P No. 17413 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

petitioner/ accused No.2 has assaulted CW1 with sickle on his back caused simple injury, assaulted CW1 with club and assaulted CW2 and caused injury to his little finger.

¶47

Upon perusal of wound certificate of CW1, he has sustained cut lacerated wound over left palm and left lower back and they are stated to be simple in nature. Even the wound certificate of CW2 indicates that he has sustained cut lacerated wound over right hand and it is stated to be simple in nature. The said injuries sustained by CW1 and CW2 are not on vital part. CW1 and CW2 are out of danger. There is no allegation against the petitioner assaulting the deceased. The said allegation of assaulting the deceased and causing his death is against accused No.1. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

¶48

Considering the above aspects, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions.

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:6175 CRL.P No. 17413 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

In the result, the following:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i) The petition is allowed.

¶54

ii) The petitioner is granted bail in SC No.81/2025 (Crime No.148/2025 of Gowribidanur Rural Police Station) pending on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura District subject to following conditions.

¶55

a) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶56

b) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.

¶57

c) Te petitioner shall attend the Trial Court on all dates hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶58

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶59

BKM

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Sri Somesha C.G v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Somesha C.G 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

Sri. Mahesh @ Handigala Mahesha Vs the State by Sidlaghatta Rural Police Station

Mr. Appu Gowda L Vs State by Kanakapura Rural Police

M.Sarathi Vs State of Karnataka by

Pruthviraj Vs State of Karnataka

Gopinath G L Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Magesh Babu G Vs the State of Karnataka