Siddaraju S Vs State by Kanakapura Rural

STATE BY KANAKAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION, KANAKAPURA CIRCLE, BENGALURU SOUTH, REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR DR BR AMBEDKARVEEDHI BENGALURU 3 560 001.

¶13

&RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH.N., HCGP)

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/2^ND ACCUSED ON BAIL IN CR.NO.114/2025 (S.C.NO.5053/2025) ON THE FILE OF THE KANAKAPURA RURAL P.S. KANAKAPURA CIRCLE, BENGALURU SOUTH, PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KANAKAPURA ALLEGING COMMISSION OF OFFENCE P/U/S 103(1), 118(1), 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶19

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The petitioner/accused No.2 is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in S.C.No.5053/2025 arising out of Crime No.114/2025 pending on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanakapura for the offence under Sections 103(1), 118(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶23

Brief facts of the case :

¶24

The case of the prosecution is that a complaint came to be filed by the complainant namely, Shivakumara

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

stating that on 26.07.2025, the parents of the informant namely, Byregowda and Kempamma having two children namely, Kariyappa and Shivakumar. His father Byregowda is having elder brother namely, Girigowda. Girigowda had a son namely, Kariyappa. Kariyappa is having a daughter named Gowramma, who is the deceased. It is alleged that there was a strained relationship between accused No.1 and the deceased Gowramma and they were living separately. There was a civil dispute existing between accused No.1 and the deceased. It is further alleged that on 26.07.2025, a quarrel had taken place between the deceased and the accused.

¶28

It is alleged that accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with sickle and accused No.2/petitioner was holding the hands of the deceased and assisting or facilitating the accused No.1 to assault the deceased. Even though, the complainant tried to rescue the deceased Gowramma, the complainant had also been assaulted with knife and also chilli powder was also thrown on him. Consequently, the complainant had also sustained bleeding injuries. However, the said Gowramma succumbed to said injuries. On the basis of the

¶29

4 -

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

complaint, the respondent-police registered a case, conducted investigation and submitted charge sheet. The matter is pending for consideration.

¶33

Heard Sri.Prasanna Kumar P., learned counsel for

¶34

the petitioner and Smt.Anitha Girish N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

¶35

It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. The incident had occurred due to sudden provocation. They had no intention to commit. The accused No.1 had no intention to commit the murder of his mother.

¶36

It is further submitted that the overt act against present petitioner is that he had held the hands of the deceased and he had facilitated the accused No.1 to commit the murder of the deceased. Moreover, the petitioner is aged about 29 years and permanent resident of Chakanahalli Village, Kanakapura Taluk and he is the only earning member of the family. His father is arrayed as accused No.1. He will abide the

¶37

5 -

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition.

¶41

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader

¶42

for respondent-State vehemently submitted that the petitioner is none other than the son of accused No.1 and the deceased. He has assisted his father in committing the murder of his mother on account of a civil dispute existing between themselves. The manner in which he has assisted his father to commit murder certainly unnatural and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail a wrong message would be given to the society at large. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submission, she prays to reject the petition.

¶43

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and

¶44

perused the averments of the charge sheet. It appears that accused No.1 and the deceased were not in cordial terms since over a considerable length of time. She was residing separately. However, there was a civil dispute existing between the deceased and the accused. It is alleged that accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with sickle and caused injuries. As a result of which, the deceased died. Accused No.2 assaulted with

¶45

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

knife to the complainant and caused injuries to him. In the meantime, he was facilitating the father to commit murder of his mother.

¶48

Be that as it may. On going through the averments of the complaint and also other materials available on record, it is appropriate to grant him bail for the reasons that the overtact of the present petitioner can be construed as a lesser degree than accused No.1. However, without adverting to the merits of the case, I proceed to pass the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶51

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.5053/2025 arising out of Crime No.114/2025 pending

¶52

on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanakapura for the offence under Sections 103(1), 118(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶53

7 -

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:18805 CRL.P No. 3971 of 2026

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

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

¶57

(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

¶58

(v) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.

¶59

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

¶60

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶61

NR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Siddaraju S v. State by Kanakapura Rural

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddaraju S v. State by Kanakapura Rural

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 Malik Imran @ Imran Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Faizal Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Sangeetha S Vs the State of Karnataka

Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Ameeruddin @ Saddam Vs the State by Udupi Town Police

Aaryan Santhosh Gurikar Vs the State of Karnataka