Allowed

Roopesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Feb 2026CRL.P/332/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a bail petition filed by an accused under Section 483 BNSS. The court held that the investigation was complete and the petitioner had no independent allegation of assault against him. Bail was granted subject to a bond and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety for like sum, subject to conditions not to tamper with witnesses and to appear on all dates.

Roopesh Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:10895 CRL.P No. 332 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 332 OF 2026 [(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)]

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

ROOPESH S/O. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT. 5^TH CROSS, NEAR JANANI STUDIO, SRINIVAGILU, BENGALURU - 560 095.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HARISH SHIRALAKOPPA ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PREMA KUMAR G.A., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

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

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY VIVEK NAGARA POLICE, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT-COMPLEX, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

(BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP)

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THEM ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.226/2025 OF VIVEK NAGAR POLICE STATION, PENDING BEFORE THE XXIX ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICAIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MAYO HALL UNIT AT BENGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCES

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:10895 CRL.P No. 332 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352 AND 3(5) OF BNS.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in Crime No.226/2025 of Viveknagar Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and

¶24

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State.

¶25

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that, there is no overt act of assault is alleged against the petitioner. The said overt act is alleged against the accused No.1 who stated to have assaulted the injured. At

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10895 CRL.P No. 332 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

that time, this petitioner stated to have held the injured. The investigation is over. Therefore the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. With these, he prayed to allow the petition.

¶29

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent would contend that, this petitioner has facilitated the accused No.1 by holding the injured to assault him with a knife. The charge sheet materials show that, there is a prima-facie case against the petitioner for offences alleged against him. With these, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for parties, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

¶31

As per averments of the complaint, accused No.1 went to the petrol bunk and after getting filled the petrol, he refused to pay Rs.50/- and subsequently when the injured came there and on insistence he paid Rs.50/-

¶32

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:10895 CRL.P No. 332 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

through some other person by UPI payment and went

¶36

away. Thereafter, accused No.1 came to the petrol bunk along with another i.e., accused No.2 entered the cash counter room, dashed to the head of the injured and at

¶37

that time, one Shashi the co-worker tried to rescue him and at that time the petitioner/accused No.2 held the injured and accused No.1 assaulted him with knife on his neck and caused injury and both ran away from the spot. Considering the said aspect, there is no allegation of assault by this petitioner. The investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed and therefore, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 11.12.2025. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

¶38

Considering all the above aspects, the petitioner

¶39

has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions. In the result, the following;

¶40

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:10895 CRL.P No. 332 of 2026

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

ORDER

¶43

The Criminal Petition is allowed . The petitioner is

¶44

granted bail in Crime No.226/2025 of Viveknagar Police Station, subject to following conditions:

¶45

i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶46

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

¶47

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted by the Court and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.

¶48

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶49

KLV

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Roopesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roopesh 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

Sreedhara @ Gombe Vs State by Koratagere Ps

Sri Amar Kumar R Vs State of Karnataka

Sandeep, Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Tahir Pasha @ Thahir Pasha Vs the State of Karnataka

Suzanee @ Suzana @ Suzain Vs the State

Anshukumar Vs State of Karnataka