Allowed

Mr. Santhosh @ Regan v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Feb 2026CRL.P/17712/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail in successive application for murder conspiracy charges. High Court allowed bail noting prolonged custody, limited witness examination, and prosecution failure to secure key witnesses, relying on Supreme Court jurisprudence regarding speedy trial under Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with sureties and specific conditions including appearance, no tampering with witnesses, and no leaving jurisdiction.

Mr. Santhosh @ Regan Vs the State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17712 OF 2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. SANTHOSH @ REGAN S/O LATE SAGAI, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS. R/AT.NEAR SATELLITE BUS STOP, TAMIL NADU BUS STOP OPP, MCT OLD QUARTERS, TIMBER LAYOUT, MYSORE ROAD, BYATARAYANAPURA, BANGALURU-560026,

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SAMPATH KUMAR D.S, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS INSPECTOR, SESHADRIPURAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING AT BANGALORE -560 001

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. RAJATH SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGED THE ACCUSED NO.16 ON BAIL IN CR.NO.128/2022, (SC.NO.346/2023) WHICH IS REGISTERED BY THE SESHADRIPURAM POLICE FOR THE

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

OFFENCE P/U/S. 201, 504, 526, 120B, 109, 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 302 OF IPC R/W U/S. 4, 25(1B)(B) OF ARMS ACT, 1959, AND THE SAID MATTER IS PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Accused No.16 in S.C.No.346/2023 pending before the Court on LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.128/2022 registered by Seshadripuram Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 504, 506, 120B, 109, 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 302 of IPC read with Section 4, 25(1B)(b) of Arms Act, 1959, is before this Court in this successive bail application filed

¶26

under Section 483 BNSS read with Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

FIR in Crime No.128/2022 was registered by

¶29

Seshadripuram Police Station, Bengaluru, initially for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC against Shanmugavalli and others based on the first

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

information dated 13.09.2022 received from Narasimha, father

¶34

of Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj, who is the deceased in the present case. The injured Ganesh subsequently died on the same day in the hospital. It is under these circumstances, the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC was invoked against the accused persons, subsequently. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 30.09.2022 and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against 17 persons. Petitioner is arrayed as accused No.17 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the Trial Court was rejected, and therefore, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.11658/2023 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 14.12.2023. Subsequently, a fresh bail application was filed by

¶35

the petitioner before the Trial Court in S.C.No.346/2023 which was rejected on 12.12.2025. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court in the successive bail petition. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner who has no other criminal antecedents is in custody from 30.09.2022. Material charge sheet witnesses who have been examined in the present case have turned hostile to the case of

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

the prosecution. Out of 57 charge sheet witnesses cited in the present case, only 7 charge sheet witnesses are examined as on this date as PWs.1 to 7. He submits that except accused Nos.13 to 16, all the other accused have been enlarged on bail in the present case. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶40

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the petition. He submits that murder was committed in public place and there are eye-witnesses to the incident in question. In the event, petitioner is enlarged on bail, he is likely to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶41

FIR in the present case was registered initially for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC based on the first information dated 13.09.2022 received from Narasimha, father of Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj who is the deceased in the present case. Undisputedly, petitioner's name is not found in the FIR. During the course of investigation, petitioner was arrested on 30.09.2022 and in the charge sheet which was subsequently filed, he was arrayed as accused No.16. As per the charge sheet allegations, accused Nos.1 and

¶42

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

3 had ill-will against the deceased Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj, and therefore, they had conspired with the other accused to commit the murder of Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj. In furtherance of such conspiracy, on 13.09.2022 at about 9 a.m. when Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj was returning home after dropping his children to their school in a two wheeler, accused No.7 - Ajith Kumar intercepted the two wheeler of Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj near Natraj Theatre within the jurisdiction of Seshadripuram Police Station and accused No.6 who was waiting near the said spot along with other accused allegedly instigated other accused in Tamil language to assault Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj and commit his murder. Thereafter, accused nos.6, 8, 9, 11, 13 to 17 allegedly assaulted Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj with deadly weapons, and as a result, he had suffered grievous injuries. Thereafter, accused persons escaped from the spot in two autorickshaws. Ganesh @ Ganesh Raj was immediately thereafter shifted to Apollo Hospital and at about 5.40 p.m., he died in the hospital while undergoing treatment.

¶46

After completing investigation, prosecution has filed charge sheet in the present case citing 57 charge sheet witnesses. According to the prosecution, C.W.4 and C.W.32 to

¶47

¶48

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

C.W.37 are the alleged eye-witnesses in the present case.

¶51

Amongst the aforesaid eye-witnesses, except C.W.35 and C.W.37, the other eye-witnesses have been already examined before the Trial Court. The submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the prosecution witnesses namely P.W.1 to P.W.7 who have been examined till date have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been treated as hostile witnesses, which is not disputed by the learned HCGP.

¶52

It is also brought to the notice of this Court that inspite of coercive steps being taken before the Trial Court, C.W.35 & C.W.37, who are the other two charge sheet witnesses, could not be secured by the prosecution, and therefore, proclamation orders have been passed as against the said two charge sheet witnesses.

¶53

Be that as it may, petitioner who has no other criminal antecedents is in custody for the last more than 40 months. Out of 57 charge sheet witnesses, only 7 charge sheet witnesses have been examined as on this date as P.W.1 to

¶54

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

P.W.7. Therefore, chances of trial being completed and the case

¶58

being disposed of in the near future is very remote.

¶59

In the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Another - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 at paragraph No.19, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows:

¶60

"19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime".

¶61

Considering the aforesaid analysis of the matter and also having regard to the period of incarceration of the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I am of the opinion that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:

¶62

¶63

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.346/2023 pending before the Court on LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.128/2022 registered by Seshadripuram Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 504, 506, 120B, 109, 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 302 of IPC read with Section 4, 25(1B)(b) of Arms Act, 1959, subject to the following conditions:

¶66

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶67

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶68

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶69

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶70

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of

¶71

¶72

NC: 2026:KHC:7052 CRL.P No. 17712 of 2025

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74