Shri. Siddaram @ Siddappa Vs State of Karnataka by

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶2

1 -

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17550 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI. SIDDARAM @ SIDDAPPA S/O DEVENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT BHIMANAHALLI CHITTAPURA TALUK GULBARGA DISTRICT

¶9

HONAPPA S/O LATE MALAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS DARKAS PETTE, CHITHAPURA TALUK GULBARGA DISTRICT

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SOMEGOWDA A.N, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION HOSAKOTE SUB DIVISION BENGALURU DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2/ ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ON BAIL IN CR.NO.308/2025 DATED 14.11.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT/HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103 R/W SEC.3(5) OF THE BNS, 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND CJM COURT, HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 under

¶22

Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.308/2025 of Hosakote Police Station, registered for

¶23

offences under Section 103 read with 3(5) of BNS.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶25

learned Additional SPP for respondent/State.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend

¶27

that the alleged incident has taken place when the petitioners and deceased were consuming alcohol. The

¶28

deceased was insisting the petitioners to get him alcohol. But the deceased had already drunk and he was under

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

intoxication and at that time there was a quarrel between the deceased and the petitioners. The petitioners alleged to have assaulted the deceased with hands. As a result, the deceased died. The petitioners have not used any weapon to assault the deceased. The incident has taken place in a sudden quarrel. There was no any intention on the part of the petitioners to kill the deceased. The offence under Section 103(1) of BNS is not attracted and at the most, the case comes under Exception 4 of Section 101 of BNS. Even the statement of CW.2, eyewitness has been recorded, who has stated the assault by the petitioners with hands to the deceased. The name of the eyewitness is also stated in the complaint. But the statement of the eyewitness has been recorded on 04.12.2025 even though the incident has taken place on 13.11.2025. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

¶32

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Per contra , learned Additional SPP would contend

¶35

that the incident has been witnessed by CW.2. CW.2 has specifically stated regarding petitioners assaulting the deceased on his neck, head and cheek with hands several times. The Doctor who conducted PM examination over the dead body of the deceased has opined that death is due to cervical cord injuries sustained. The assault is on the neck and there is injury to cervical cord as the petitioners have assaulted the deceased on his neck. The charge sheet material show prima-facie case against the petitioners for offences alleged against them. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

¶36

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

¶37

As per the charge sheet the case of the prosecution is that on 13.11.2025 at about 10.00 p.m. when petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were consuming alcohol in front of Srinivas Wine Stores, at that time, the deceased

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

came there and asked them to get him the alcohol. The petitioners have refused as he was already under intoxication. At that time the deceased abused the petitioners in filthy words and held the collar of accused No.1, at that time accused Nos. 1 and 2 have assaulted the deceased with hands on his neck and as a result, he died. The alleged incident has taken place in a sudden quarrel between petitioners and the deceased. Both the petitioners and the deceased were under intoxication. Whether the petitioners had intended to cause the death of the deceased is a matter of trial. The petitioners have not used any weapon to assault the deceased. The assault is stated to be by hands. CW.2 is the eyewitness to the incident and he has stated regarding the petitioners assaulting the deceased with hands. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners.

¶41

6 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:8716 CRL.P No. 17550 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Considering the above aspects, the petitioners

¶45

have made out case for grant of bail with conditions. In the result, the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

The petition is allowed. The petitioners are granted

¶48

bail in Crime No. 308/2025 of Hosakote Police Station, subject to following conditions:

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

(iii) Petitioners shall attend the trial Court on all dates hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶52

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶53

DKB

¶54

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

Shri. Siddaram @ Siddappa v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Siddaram @ Siddappa v. State of Karnataka by

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 Savikumar Vs State of Karnataka

Jayashankar Alias Jocky Vs State of Karnataka

Madhu Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Ashraf Chalil Vs State of Karnataka

Chandrashekar B K Vs State of Karnataka by

Mrs Naziya Vs the State by Arakere Ps