Sri. Darshan C Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.85/2025 (CC NO.620/2025) OF KIRUGAVALU POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM COURT, MALAVALLI MANDYA THE OFFENCES P/U/S 126(2), 103 OF BNS 2023, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

¶29

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

The petitioner/accused No.1 is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in C.C.No.620/2025, arising out of Crime No.85/2025, pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM Court, Malavalli, Mandya for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2) and 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶36

Brief facts of the case :

¶37

The case of the prosecution is that CW15 is the younger sisters of the petitioner. The deceased Manju was the son of CW1. Both deceased and CW15 were loving each other. The accused used to quarrel with deceased Manju in that context and he warned deceased Manju to distance himself from his sister - CW15. The deceased Manju went along with the elders to give a proposal for marriage of CW15 to her house. At that time, the accused and his father refused to perform the marriage with the deceased Manju. However, CW15 insisted the family members that she was loving Manju and intended to marry him. Therefore, she was thrown out of the house and asked her to go along with the said Manju.

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

It is stated that the deceased Manju took CW15 and accommodated her to live in the house of CW9 as she has not completed the age of majority for marriage. There is a frequent and constant quarrel between the deceased Manju and accused in connection with the said issue. On 26.08.2025 around about 07.45 p.m. The deceased Manju came to the house of CW22 Puttarajamma to have a talk with him and thereafter, he was proceeding to his village. At that time, the accused took motorcycle of his uncle and followed the deceased Manju and pushed him to the ground. As a result of which the deceased fell down on the ground. In the meantime, the accused took size stone and put it on the back side of the head of the deceased. Consequently, the deceased died at the spot. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant who is the father of the deceased.

¶41

Based on the said complaint, the respondent police registered a case in Cr.No.85/2025 against the petitioner and conducted investigation. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted.

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Heard Sri. Pavan Kumar G, learned counsel for the

¶45

petitioner and Ms. Asma Kouser, learned Addl. SPP for respondent-State.

¶46

It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. Merely because there was a frequent quarrel between the petitioner and the deceased, a false case has been registered against the petitioner and he has been falsely implicated. The petitioner is aged about 20 years and permanent resident of Ramanathamole Village, Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District. He will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶47

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State vehemently submitted that the motive, preparation and execution of work has been established in filing the charge sheet against the petitioner. This deceased Manju was loving the younger sister of the

¶48

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

petitioner when the deceased along with others went to the house of petitioner to give proposal for marriage of CW15, the petitioner and his father refused to perform the marriage with deceased Manju. However, CW15 went along with Manju and she was staying in the house of CW9 who is the maternal uncle of deceased Manju. There was a frequent quarrel between the petitioner and deceased Manju in respect of the said issue. The prosecution clearly established that the petitioner had committed murder of the deceased by throwing the size stone on the head of the deceased. The FSL report would indicate that he is directly involved in the said murder. In fact, the charge sheet has already been filed. Now, it is the stage to face the trial. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses. Making such submissions, learned Addl. SPP prays to reject the petition.

¶51

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the charge sheet, it would indicate that the petitioner is the elder brother of CW15. CW15 was loving with the deceased Manju. CW15 eloped along with the deceased Manju and she started residing with the said

¶52

7 -

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

Manju. It appears that the petitioner was not happy about the said development. One or the other way, he was quarrelling with the deceased Manju.

¶56

Be that as it may, the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. None of the witnesses have stated about the involvement of the petitioner. However, a complaint

¶57

came to be registered against unknown persons. Having considered the said aspect, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶60

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be

¶61

enlarged on bail in C.C.No.620/2025 arising out of Crime No.85/2025 pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM Court, Malavalli, Mandya for the aforesaid offences on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

¶62

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:14836 CRL.P No. 3288 of 2026

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the

¶65

likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶66

(iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

¶67

(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the

¶68

Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

¶69

(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any

¶70

criminal cases till disposal of the case.

¶71

In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.

¶72

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶73

JS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47

Sri. Darshan C v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Darshan C 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

Benakesha, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Nagesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Kirana Kumara Y R Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Samson @ Shyam Vs State of Karantaka

M Saravana Vs State of Karnataka

Sri K v Rajesh Vs State of Karnataka