Allowed

Bhaskar @ Sagar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2026CRL.A/2515/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka heard criminal appeals against bail rejection orders in a murder case under SC/ST POA Act. The Court allowed one appeal, set aside the rejection, and granted bail with conditions. The other appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail order set aside; Crl.A. 2515/2025 allowed; Accused released on bail upon executing self-bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties.

Bhaskar @ Sagar Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2515 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))

¶8

C/W

¶9

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5 OF 2026 (U/S 14(A) (2))

¶10

IN CRL.A. NO.2515/2025

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

BHASKAR @ SAGAR AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKATESHA R/AT KAVALAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, JANATA COLONY, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-562 016. (IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY).

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

(BY SRI M.R. CHINNASWAMY MANOHAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶18

REP. BY SURYANAGARA P.S., ANEKAL SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

¶19

REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-01.

¶20

PADMARAJU S/O LATE THIMMAIAH,

¶21

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT MARASURU VILLAGE, INDIRANAGAR, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-562 016, BENGALURU DISTRICT.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶27

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING SET ASIDE THE BAIL ORDER DATED 23.09.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BNEGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.1575/2025 AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 ON BAIL IN SPL.C.C.NO.342/2024 (CRIME NO.109/2024) REGISTERED BY THE SURYANAGARA P.S., BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 302, 201, 120-B, 109, 143, 144, 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU.

¶28

IN CRL.A. NO.5/2026

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

ARJUN S/O BHADRAIAH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT AVADADENA HALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT-562106 (NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY). (BY SRI MANJUNATH M.R., ADVOCATE)

¶31

...APPELLANT

¶32

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

AND:

¶36

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SURYANAGARA P.S., BENGALURU. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶37

PADMARAJU S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT MARASURU VILLAGE (INDIRANAGARA), KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-562106.

¶38

...RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶40

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN SPL.NO.342/2024 ON 09.12.2025 AND ETC.

¶41

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶42

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶43

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶44

The appellant in Crl.A.No.2515/2025 has preferred this appeal against the order dated 23^rd September, 2025 in Crl.Misc.No.1575 of 2025 and the appellant in Crl.A.No.5/2026 is preferred against the order dated 09.12.2025 in Spl.C.No.342/2024, both passed by the II Additional District

¶45

¶46

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (for short 'the trial Court').

¶49

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

¶50

Brief facts leading to these appeals are that, on the basis of the complaint filed by one Padmaraju, S/o late Thimmaiah, Suryanagar Police have registered the case in Crime No.109/2024 against the accused-Arjun and others for the offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), 109, 143, 144, 149 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶51

Appellant-Bhaskara, who is accused No.4, had filed application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C and accused No.1-Arjun had filed application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. Both came to be rejected by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by

¶52

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

rejection of bail applications by the trial Court, appellants have preferred these appeals.

¶55

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/accused No.4, would submit that the appellant is innocent and has got valid and tenable defence. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the above case at the instance of persons inimical towards him. The name of the appellant is neither found in the complaint nor in the FIR. The appellant has been arrested on 29.02.2024 and till date he is in judicial custody i.e., for almost two years. The Investigating Officer has cited 44 witnesses in the charge sheet and till now the trial

¶56

is not yet commenced. Considerable time is required to conclude the trial. Till conclusion of the trial, the detention of the accused amounts to pre-trial punishment. Ultimately, if this Court acquits the accused, State will not compensate the ordeal undergone by the accused as an under-trial prisoner. The accused has already been subjected to prolonged incarceration amounting to pre-trial punishment. The motive and intention attributed by the prosecution to the appellant is baseless and the appellant has absolutely no connection or motive to participate in the alleged incident. The Post-Mortem report of

¶57

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

the deceased reveals that the death was due to skull fracture

¶60

and intracranial hemorrhage as a result of sharp force injuries. There is no medical opinion connecting the appellant to the alleged blow which has been attributed to him. The entire case of the prosecution rests on the statement of CW4-Srikanta, who is alleged to be an eye-witness to the said incident. The statement of the said witness is recorded on 02.03.2024, i.e. after lapse of one week. The alleged eye-witness has stated in his statement that he was present near the spot of incident in the early morning around 03.30 a.m., which itself is unbelievable. Apart from that, he has stated in statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C that he was near the place of incident for about 45 minutes. Later, he left that place and again came back to the place of incident and saw the police were inspecting the spot and verifying the dead body. This witness has not whispered anything either to the police or to the people assembled at the spot regarding physical features of the assailants and also this witness has not identified the appellant accused No.4, in the police station. The conduct of the alleged eyewitness clearly goes to show that, he has not witnessed the incident and the IO has planted this witness as an eyewitness

¶61

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

to strengthen the case of the prosecution and to detain the appellant and other recruit persons in judicial custody till conclusion of the trial. The Investigating Officer has not conducted test identification parade, as the assailants are not known to the eyewitness.

¶64

The case of the prosecution is that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has collected DVR and CCTV found near the place of incident and claimed that it has been sent to FSL to retrieve the images. However, charge sheet is filed on 02.05.2024. Till the date, IO has not produced the FSL report of the DVR. The provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 does not apply to the appellant, as he himself is a member of Scheduled Caste. Absolutely, there is no material to connect the appellant to the alleged crime. Accused Nos.3, 5 to 9 have already been granted bail by the Sessions Court and by this Court. The appellant is also standing on the same footing. As such, he is also entitled for bail on the principle of parity. On all these grounds, it is sought to allow the appeal.

¶65

As against this, Smt. N. Anitha Girish, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State,

¶66

¶67

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

would submit that the trial Court has appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and facts and there are no grounds to interfere with these appeals and accordingly, sought for dismissal of appeals.

¶70

Sri Manjunath M.R., learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused No.1-Arjun in Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2026, after arguing the matter at length, prays the leave of the court to withdraw the appeal. He has also filed a memo to that extent. Memo is taken on record. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2026 in respect of accused No.1-Arjun, is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶71

Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant in Criminal Appeal No.2515 of 2025 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and on perusal of materials placed before this Court, the following point would arise for my consideration:

¶72

"Whether the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.2515 of 2025 has made out a ground to interfere with the impugned order?"

¶73

¶74

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶75

HC-KAR

¶76

I have examined the materials placed before the court. On the basis of the complaint filed by Padmaraju, Suryanagar Police have registered a case in Crime No.109 of 2024 against the accused Arjun for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. The investigating officer submitted charge-sheet against accused 1 to 9 in which it is shown accused 8 and 9 are absconding. In column 17 of the chargesheet, it is alleged as under:

¶77

"17 PÉÃ¹£À ¸ÀAQë¥ÀÛ «ªÀgÀ : [CªÀ±Àå«zÀÝ°è ¥ÀævÉåÃPÀ ºÁ¼É ®UÀwÛ¹] Brief Facts of the case Add separate sheet if necessary.

¶78

PÀ®A 302-201-120(©)-109-143-144-149 L¦¹ eÉÆvÉUÉ PÀ®A 3 PÁè¸ï 2( va) J¸ï.¹/J¸ï.n DPïÖ.

¶79

F zÉÆÃµÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖ PÁ®A 1 gÀ°è£À ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀjUÉ ªÀÄÈvÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï 1£ÉÃ ªÀÄUÀ£ÁVgÀÄvÁÛ£É ¢£ÁAPÀ 02.08.2017 gÀAzÀÄ CwÛ¨É¯É ¥ÉÇ°Ã¸ï oÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀzÀÄÝ vÀlÖ£ÀºÀ½î PÉgÉAiÀÄ ºÀwÛgÀ PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄ CtÚ ªÀÄ£ÉÆÃeï @ §§Äè JA§ÄªÀ£À£ÀÄß ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÀ 1£ÉÃ ªÀÄUÀ (ªÀÄÈvÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ E§âgÀÄ PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrzÀÝjAzÀ CwÛ¨É¯É ¥ÉÇ°Ã¸ï oÁuÉAiÀÄ°è ªÉÆ.¸ÀA.26/2017 PÀ¯A 302 L¦¹ ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR¯ÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ªÀÄÈvÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ E§âgÀÄ ¸ÀÄªÀiÁgÀÄ 6 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À PÁ® ¥ÀgÀ¥Àà£À CUÀæºÁgÀzÀ PÉÃAzÀæ PÁgÁUÀÈºÀzÀ°èzÀÄÝ ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀÅ ªÀiÁ£Àå 2£ÉÃ C¥ÀgÀ f¯Áè ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀvÀæ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ C£ÉÃPÀ¯ï £À°è J¸ï.¹. £ÀA.5075/2017 gÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqÉzÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ 13.07.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄÄPÁÛAiÀÄUÉÆArzÀÝjAzÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ £ÁåAiÀiÁAUÀ

¶80

10 -

¶81

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶82

HC-KAR

¶83

§AzsÀ£À¢AzÀ ©qÀÄUÀqÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄUÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ªÀÄgÀ¸ÀÆgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄzÀ EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀzÀ°è J°èAiÀÄÄ ºÉÆgÀUÀqÉ ºÉÆÃUÀzÉ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°èzÀÝ£ÀÄ.

¶84

PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï ªÀÄwÛvÀÛgÀ PÀqÉAiÀÄ°è NqÁrPÉÆArzÁÝUÀ, PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¨sÉÃn ªÀiÁr ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄªÁUÉÎ 8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀÄjvÀÄ, ¤Ã£ÀÄ eÉÊ°¤AzÀ ©qÀÄUÀqÉ ºÉÆA¢ ºÉÆgÀUÉ §A¢¢ÝÃAiÀÄ, ¤£Àß CtÚ ªÀÄ£ÉÆÃeï @ §§Äè C£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrzÀ jÃwAiÀÄ¯Éè ¤£Àß£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀÄvÉÛÃªÉ JAzÀÄ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ºÉÃ½PÉÆAqÀÄ ¸ÉÌZï ºÁPÀÄwÛzÁÝgÉ, ¤£ÀUÉ K£ÀÄ ¸À¥ÉÇÃmïð ¨ÉÃPÀÄ, £ÁªÀÅ ªÀiÁqÀÄvÉÛÃªÉ, ¤Ã£ÀÄ ¤£Àß eÉÆvÉUÉ AiÀiÁgÁzÀgÀÄ ¸ÉßÃ»vÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÉÃj¹ PÉÆAqÀÄ ªÉÆzÀ®Ä «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁr ªÀÄÄV¹©qÀÄ JAzÀÄ ¥ÀæZÉÆÃ¢¹, PÀÄªÀÄäPÀÄÌ ¤ÃrzÀÝjAzÀ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ 8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼À ªÀiÁvÀÄUÀ½AzÀ ¥ÉæÃgÀuÉUÉÆAqÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÀ£Àß CtÚ ªÀÄ£ÉÆÃeï @ §§Äè C£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀÄªÀ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ zÉéÃµÀ ElÄÖPÉÆAqÀÄ, vÀ£Àß ¸ÉßÃ»vÀgÁzÀ PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 2 jAzÀ 7 gÀ ªÀgÀV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀ£Àß eÉÆvÉUÉ ¸ÉÃj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, £À£Àß CtÚ ªÀÄ£ÉÆÃeï @ §§Äè JA§ÄªÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁr eÉÊ°¤AzÀ ©qÀÄUÀqÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄªÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ AiÀÄ±ÀªÀAvÀ E§âgÀÄ £À£Àß£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¸ÉÌZï ºÁPÀÄwÛzÁÝgÉ, £Á£ÀÄ ªÉÆzÀ®Ä «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ. EzÀPÉÌ £À£ÀUÉ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀÅzÁV 8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ ºÉÃ½gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀÝjAzÀ ¤ÃªÉ®ègÀÄ £ÀªÀUÉ ¸À¥ÉÇÃmïð ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉÃ½PÉÆAqÁUÀ 2 jAzÀ 7 gÀ ªÀgÉV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÉ ¸À¥ÉÇÃmïð ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀÅzÁV ºÉÃ½ M¦àPÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. EªÀgÉ®ègÀÄ M¦àPÉÆAqÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä C¥ÁAiÀÄPÀgÀ DAiÀÄÄzsÀUÀ¼ÁzÀ 3 ¯ÁAUï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 1 ªÀÄZÀÑ£ÀÄß vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §aÑlÄÖPÉÆArzÀÝ£ÀÄ.

¶85

11 -

¶86

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

¢£ÁAPÀ 24.02.2024 gÀAzÀÄ gÁwæ ¸ÀÄªÀiÁgÀÄ 7:00 UÀAmÉUÉ PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 1 jAzÀ 7 gÀ ªÀgÀV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÁQë-21 gÀªÀgÀÄ PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛgÀÄªÀ ªÉÊ.JA ¨ÁgïUÉ ¸ÁQë-22 gÀªÀgÀ ºÉ¸Àj£À°ègÀÄªÀ PÉJ-51-EqÀ§Äè-1275 »gÉÆÃºÉÆÃAqÀ ¸Éà÷èAqÀgï ªÉÆÃmÁgï ¸ÉÊPÀ¯ï, ¸ÁQë-23 gÀªÀgÀ ºÉ¸Àj£À°ègÀÄªÀ PÉJ-41-EAiÀÄÄ-4692 C¥Éæ¯Á ¸ÀÆÌlgï, ¸ÁQë-25 gÀªÀgÀ ºÉ¸Àj£À°ègÀÄªÀ PÉJ01-JPÉ-8540 ¥Áå¸ÉAdgï DmÉÆÃzÀ°è §AzÀÄ, ªÉÊ.JA.¨Ágï PÁ¥ËAqï M¼ÀUÉ EgÀÄªÀ UÀ¸ÀUÀ¸É ªÀÄgÀzÀ PÉ¼ÀUÉ PÀÄ½vÀÄ, ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄUÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï £À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä M¼À¸ÀAZÀÄ gÀÆ¦¹, gÁwæ 10:00 UÀAmÉ £ÀAvÀgÀ J®ègÀÄ C°èAzÀ ºÉÆgÀlÄ, 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ vÁ£ÀÄ ªÉÆzÀ¯É vÉUÉzÀÄ ElÄÖPÉÆArzÀÝ C¥ÁAiÀÄPÀgÀ

¶89

DAiÀÄÄzsÀUÀ¼ÁzÀ 3 ¯ÁAUï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ । ªÀÄZÀÑ£ÀÄß vÁ£ÀÄ §aÑnÖzÀÝ eÁUÀPÉÌ §AzÀÄ DAiÀÄÄzsÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß JwÛPÉÆAqÀÄ ªÉÄÃ®ÌAqÀ DmÉÆÃzÀ M¼ÀUÉ ºÁQPÉÆAqÀÄ C°èAzÀ ºÉÆgÀlÄ ZÀAzÁ¥ÀÅgÀ, Dgï.PÉ qÁ§ §½ §AzÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀ C°èAzÀ Dgï.PÉ ¥sÁgïä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄwÛvÀÛgÀ PÀqÉUÀ¼À°è ¸ÀÄvÁÛrPÉÆAqÀÄ, 1 jAzÀ 7 gÀ ªÀgÉV£À CgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÉA§ ¸ÀªÀiÁ£À GzÉÝÃ±ÀºÉÆA¢, C¥ÁAiÀÄPÀgÀªÁzÀ ¯ÁAUÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄZÀÄÑ DAiÀÄÄzsÀUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ 25.02.2024 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É¼ÀV£À eÁªÀ 3:30 UÀAmÉ¬ÄAzÀ 4:00 UÀAmÉ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄPÉÌ D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï G¥À «¨sÁUÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ, ¸ÀÆAiÀÄð£ÀUÀgÀ ¥ÉÇ°Ã¸ï oÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀzÀÄÝ, ªÀÄgÀ¸ÀÆgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄzÀ EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ªÁlgï mÁåAPï ªÀÄÄA¨sÁUÀzÀ mÁgÀÄ gÀ¸ÉÛUÉ §AzÀÄ, ªÉÆzÀ®Ä 2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 5£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ PÉJ-41-EAiÀÄÄ-4692 C¥Éæ¯Á ¸ÀÆÌlgï£À°è «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgï ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ §½ ºÉÆÃV DvÀ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°ègÀÄªÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß RavÀ¥Àr¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ªÁ¥À¸ï ªÁlgï mÁåAPï ªÀÄÄA¨sÁUÀzÀ gÀ¸ÉÛUÉ §AzÀÄ 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÉ w½¹zÁUÀ, 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ 3 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 5£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ½UÉ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß ªÀÄ£É¬ÄAzÀ J©â¹ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §gÀÄªÀAvÉ ºÉÃ½ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹. 6£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÉ gÀZÉ PÀmÉÖ §½, 7£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÉ ¥ÀAZÁ¬ÄÛ PÀbÉÃj §½ ºÉÆÃV ¤AvÀÄ ªÁZïªÀiÁqÀÄªÀAvÉ ºÉÃ½ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹zÀÄÝ, 3 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 5£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß ªÀÄ£É¬ÄAzÀ J©â¹ vÀªÀÄäUÀ¼À eÉÆvÉAiÀÄ°è ªÁlgï mÁåAPï, ªÀÄÄA¨sÁUÀzÀ gÀ¸ÉÛUÉ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ 3£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ

¶90

12 -

¶91

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶92

HC-KAR

¶93

«dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß vÀ¦à¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃUÀzÀAvÉ »rzÀÄPÉÆAqÁUÀ, vÀPÀët 1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 2£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ DmÉÆÃzÀ°èzÀÝ vÀ¯Á MAzÉÆAzÀÄ ºÀjvÀªÁzÀ ¯ÁAUïUÀ¼À£ÀÄß JwÛPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ KPÁKQ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À vÀ¯ÉUÉ 5-6 ¨Áj §®ªÁV ºÉÆqÉ¢zÀÝjAzÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ gÀ¸ÉÛ ªÉÄÃ¯É ©zÁÝUÀ, 4£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ DmÉÆÃzÀ°èzÀÝ 1 ªÀÄZÀÑ£ÀÄß JwÛPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁzÀ£À ¨É¤ß£À ªÉÄÃ¯É ºÉÆqÉzÀÄ ¸ÀÜ¼ÀzÀ°è PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F J¯Áè zÀÈ±ÀåªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀÜ¼ÀzÀ°èzÀÝ ¹¹n«AiÀÄ°è (gÉPÁqïð) ¸ÉgÉAiÀiÁVgÀÄªÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀÄ §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. £ÀAvÀgÀ 1 jAzÀ 7 gÀ ªÀgÀV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ C°èAzÀ vÀ¦à¹PÉÆAqÀÄ vÀ«Ä¼ÀÄ£ÁqÀÄ PÀqÉUÉ ºÉÆÃV qÉAPÀtÂPÉÆÃmÉAiÀÄ°ègÀÄªÀ ¸ÁQë-18 gÀªÀgÀ §mÉÖ CAUÀrAiÀÄ°è 6 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 7£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ J®èjUÀÆ ºÉÆ¸À §mÉÖUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ, qÉAPÀtÂPÉÆÃmÉ vÁ®ÄèPÀÄ, ºÀ¼ÉHgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄzÀ SÁ gÁV ºÉÆ®zÀ°è ºÉÆ¸À §mÉÖUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁQPÉÆAqÀÄ. «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è zsÀj¹zÀÝ §mÉÖUÀ½UÉ gÀPÀÛPÀ¯ÉAiÀiÁVzÀÝjAzÀ J®ègÀÄ CzÉÃ ºÉÆ®zÀ°è §mÉÖUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ©aÑ ¨ÉAQ¬ÄAzÀ ¸ÀÄlÄÖºÁQ ¸ÁQëAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £Á±À¥Àr¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä G¥ÀAiÉÆÃV¹zÀÝ 2 ¯ÁAUï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 1 ªÀÄZÀÑ£ÀÄß vÀ«Ä¼ÀÄ£Ár£À ¸ÀÆ¼ÀVj vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ gÁAiÀÄPÉÆÃmÉ gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°ègÀÄªÀ d«ÄÃ¤£À°è PÀvÁÛ¼É VqÀzÀ ¥ÉÆzÉ M¼ÀUÉ AiÀiÁjUÀÆ PÁtzÀAvÉ §aÑlÄÖ, PÀÈvÀåPÉÌ G¥ÀAiÉÆÃV¹zÀÝ | DmÉÆÃ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 2 ªÉÆÃmÁgï ¸ÉÊPÀ¯ïUÀ¼À£ÀÄß C£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ gÁªÀÄPÀÈµÁÚ¥ÀÅgÀ UÁæªÀÄzÀ ºÀwÛgÀ EgÀÄªÀ PÀÈ¶ E¯ÁSÉ vÀgÀ¨ÉÃw PÉÃAzÀæzÀ ¥ÀPÀÌzÀ°ègÀÄªÀ PÁqÀÄ VqÀªÀÄgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¨É¼ÉzÀÄ ¤AwÛgÀÄªÀ ªÀÄgÀVqÀUÀ¼À ºÀwÛgÀ ¤°è¹ ºÉÆÃVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

¶94

PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ ¤ÃrzÀ PÀÄªÀÄäQÌ¤AzÀ, 1£ÉÃ DgÉÆÃ¦AiÀÄÄ ¥ÉæÃgÀuÉUÉÆAqÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ zÉéÃµÀ¢AzÀ 2 jAzÀ 7gÀ ªÀgÀV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀ£Àß eÉÆvÉ ¸ÉÃj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ M¼À¸ÀAZÀÄ gÀÆ¦¹, ¥Àj²µÀÖ eÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀ ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄUÀ «dAiÀÄPÀÄªÀiÁgÀ£À£ÀÄß C¥ÁAiÀÄPÀgÀ DAiÀÄÄzsÀUÀ½AzÀ ºÉÆqÉzÀÄ, §§ðgÀªÁV PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁr, ¸ÁQëAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £Á±À ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ JAzÀÄ zÁR¯ÉUÀ½AzÀ ¸ÁQëzÁgÀgÀ «ZÁgÀuÉ¬ÄAzÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÀ¤SÉ¬ÄAzÀ DgÉÆÃ¥À zÀÈqÀ ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

¶95

13 -

¶96

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶97

HC-KAR

¶98

DzÀÝjAzÀ ªÉÄÃ®ÌAqÀ PÁ®A 12 gÀ°è PÀAqÀ 1 jAzÀ 9 gÀ ªÀgÀV£À DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ ºÉÆj¸À®àlÖ zÉÆÃµÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖ."

¶99

With regard to accused No.4-Bhaskar in criminal Appeal No.2515 of 2025 is concerned, it is alleged by the prosecution that when Vijayakumar fell on road, accused No.4 brought machete from autorickshaw and assaulted Vijayakumar on his back. The eye-witness Srikantha has not identified this accused in the police station. The trial court has granted bail to accused No.8-Karthik in Criminal Misc.160 of 2025 dated 3^rd March 2025. The trial court has also granted bail to Manoj Kumar @ Manoj in Criminal Misc. No.1610 of 2024 dated 08^th August, 2024. This court has granted bail to accused No.3Mahesh and accused No.6 and 7 viz. Hemanth and Murugesh in Criminal Appeals No.2356 of 2024 and 1916 of 2024 dated 24^th June, 2025. Accused No.4 is in judicial custody, since the date of arrest i.e. 29^th February, 2024. Considering the nature and gravity of the offences, fact and circumstances of the case and granting of bail to other accused, I am of the opinion that it is

¶100

just and proper to grant bail to accused No.4 with conditions.

¶101

14 -

¶102

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶103

HC-KAR

¶104

Hence, I answer the point that arose for my consideration, in the affirmative.

¶105

Resultantly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶106

O R D E R

¶107

i) Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2026 preferred by accused No.1-Arjun is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the appellant/accused No.1 is reserved liberty to file bail application after recording evidence of material witnesses before the trial court;

¶108

ii) Criminal appeal No.2515 of 2025 is allowed;

¶109

iii) Order dated 2 3^rd September, 2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1575 of 2025 by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru , is set aside. Criminal Misc.No.1575/2025 filed by Accused No.4 under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, is allowed;

¶110

iv) Appellant-Accused No.4 shall be released on bail upon executing self-bond for Rs.2,00,000/with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

¶111

v) Appellant-accused No.4 shall not commit similar offence;

¶112

NC: 2026:KHC:5927 CRL.A No. 2515 of 2025 C/W CRL.A No. 5 of 2026

¶113

15 -

¶114

HC-KAR

¶115

vi) Appellant-accused No.4 shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner;

¶116

vii) Appellant-accused No.4 shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing;

¶117

viii) Appellant-accused No.4 shall co-operate for trial.

¶118

Registry is directed to send the copy of this judgment to

¶119

the concerned court.

¶120

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶121

DHA,LNN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Bhaskar @ Sagar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaskar @ Sagar v. State of Karnataka

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

Sri. Anand Kumar Vs Sri. Ashok

Sri S Harsha Vs Sri Ravi

Official Liquidator of Vs Dr Mahesh K Menon

Sridhara @ Kenda Vs the State of Karnataka

C H Puttaraju Vs C K Shivakumar

M/S. Vts Tf Air Systems Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/S Clean Air Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd.