Karnataka High Court
Charan vs State Of Karnataka on 12 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:14852
CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3122 OF 2026 (439(Cr.PC) /
483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. CHARAN
S/O RAMAKRISHNA,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT GANTTIGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST,
YELAHANKA TALUK,
BANGALORE - 560 064.
Digitally
signed by
SREEDHARAN
BANGALORE
SUSHMA ...PETITIONER
LAKSHMI
Location: High (BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR H C.,ADVOCATE)
Court of
Karnataka
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEVANAHALLI P.S.
REP. BY SPP
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:14852
CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026
HC-KAR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ASMA KOUSER., ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS)
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2
PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED
TO ENLARGE THEM ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.57/2025 OF
DEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL DIST, AT
BANGALORE, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE
UNDER SECTIONS 140, 103, 3(5) OF BHARATHIYA NYAYA
SANHITA ACT-2023, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE V
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SITTING AT
DEVANAHALLI BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, AT BANGALORE,
IN S.C. NO.15059/2025, ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS,
IN THE ABOVE CASE IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:14852
CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner/accused No.2 is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in S.C.No.15059/2025, arising out of Crime No.57/2025, pending on the file of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, sitting at Devanahalli, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore for the offences punishable under Sections 140, 103, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ('BNS'), 2023.
Brief facts of the case:
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant - Sri. Ramachandra H is the father of the deceased Preetham. It is stated that the deceased Preetham was working as a delivery boy at Zepto Company situated at Sulibele. The Preetham and C.W.14-Pallavi were loving each other. CW14 went to Chitradurga for her studies. Preetham had been to Chitradurga on many occasions to meet her. During that time, he had taken some photographs and videos which are stated to be obscene and he had kept those photos and videos in his mobile. Sometimes later, CW14 tried to maintain distance with Preetham. However, dissatisfied with the said development, Preetham used to send photographs and videos -4- NC: 2026:KHC:14852 CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026 HC-KAR to CW14 in order to bring her back. Accused No. 1 is the relative of CW4. He happened to see the said photographs accidentally. When he enquired about the said photographs, she has stated the fact that those photographs were sent by the deceased Preetham.
3. On 02.05.2025 at about 08.30 p.m., he took Brezza Car bearing Reg.No. K-50-MD-3896 which belongs to CW13 along with accused Nos. 2 to 6 and they came to a Zepto Sulibele Hub where the Preetham was sitting with C.Ws. 2 and 3 in the temporary shed of Zepto Company. Accused Nos. 1 to 6 allegedly kidnapped the said Preetham in a car, assaulted him with hands in the car and accused No. 1 closed the mouth of victim, strangulated the neck of Preetham and killed him. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant who is the father of the deceased.
4. Based on the said complaint, the respondent police registered a case in Cr.No.57/2025 against the petitioner and conducted investigation. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:14852 CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026 HC-KAR
5. Heard Sri. Harish Kumar H.C., learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Asma Kouser, learned Addl. SPP for respondent-State.
6. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 and he is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. C.Ws.2 and 3 stated to be the witnesses to the incident, the fact remains that no identification parade has been conducted to identify the petitioner and others. In fact, the petitioner and others were strangers to C.Ws.2 and 3. The presence of the petitioner itself is doubtful. Hence, the benefit of doubt should be given to the petitioner. Under such circumstances, if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody, it would be an abuse of process of law. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.
7. Per contra, learned Addl. SPP for respondent -State vehemently submitted that the petitioner was present along -6- NC: 2026:KHC:14852 CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026 HC-KAR with the other accused at the spot of crime and committed the murder of the deceased Preetham. Motive and preparation, both are established by way of filing the charge sheet. The petitioner has committed heinous offence. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. 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.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the record that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 2 and he is a friend of accused No. 1. In fact, Accused No. 1 is the relative of CW14 to whom it is alleged that the deceased was loving her and also he was having her photographs and videos which are held to be obscene. The prosecution projected that the deceased Preetham was sitting along with CWs. 2 and 3 in the temporary shed of the Zepto Company where he was working as a salesman. However, the identification parade to identify the assailants has not been conducted in the present case. Under such circumstances, it is -7- NC: 2026:KHC:14852 CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026 HC-KAR appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.15059/2025, arising out of Crime No.57/2025, pending on the file of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, sitting at Devanahalli, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore for the aforesaid offences on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner shall affix his signature before the Jurisdictional Police/Respondent police once in a fifteen days on Saturday between 10.00 am to 2.00 p.m., till conclusion of the trial.-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:14852 CRL.P No. 3122 of 2026 HC-KAR iv. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.
v. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. 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.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE JS/-
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42