Karnataka High Court
Mr Manjuntha @ Thyagarajanagara Manja vs State Of Karnataka on 17 November, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:47039
CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12547 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1. MR MANJUNATHA @ THYAGARAJANAGARA MANJA
SON OF BABU,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.93/B,
NARAYANAMMA BUILDING,
11TH CROSS, BEHIND BRIGHTWAY SCHOOL,
DODDAGOWDANAPALYA,
BENGALURU - 560 061
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
Digitally signed by SUBRAMANYAPURA POLICE STATION,
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI REPRESENTED BY
Location: HIGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. B. PUSHPALATHA, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) BY
THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE HIM ON
BAIL IN SC.NO.911/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.52/2020 OF
SUBRAMANYAPURA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 144,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:47039
CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025
HC-KAR
323, 307 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE
FILE OF HONBLE LXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-68).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by accused No.6 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in S.C.No.911/2025 (arising out of Crime No. 52/2020 of Subramanyapura Police Station) registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 323 and 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, pending on the file of LXVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH No.68), Bangalore.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent - State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, petitioner has been granted bail at crime -3- NC: 2025:KHC:47039 CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025 HC-KAR stage on 03.07.2020 and subsequently, he has not received summons and therefore, he has not appeared in the case. The petitioner has been secured by executing NBW on 13.06.2021 and from that date he is in judicial custody. With these, he prayed to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would contend that, after grant of bail in Crime No.52/2020 the petitioner has been involved in 8 cases which are noted below:
Bandepalya P.S. Cr. No. 72/2024 Sec. 379 IPC K.S.Layout P.S. 225/2020 Sec. 326, 323, 341, 503 IPC 124/2020 Sec. 399, 402 IPC Thalaghattapura 174/2019 Sec. 399, 402 IPC P.S. Bidadi P.S. 99/2021 Sec. 420, 379 IPC Kumbalgodu P.S. 349/2023 R.R.Nagar P.S. 192/2021 Sec. 457, 380 IPC -4- NC: 2025:KHC:47039 CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025 HC-KAR Puttenahalli P.S. 348/2023 Sec. 392 IPC Girinagar P.S. 338/2023 Sec. 392 IPC C.K.Acchukattu P.S. 114/2025 Sec. 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) BNS So due to the absence of this petitioner, the case against him has been split up. The absence of petitioner has caused hindrance in the disposal of the case registered against him. The State has incurred huge expenses in securing the presence of the petitioner. If the petitioner is again granted bail, there are chances of him threatening the prosecution witnesses and committing offences. With these she prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for parties, this Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.
6. Crime has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No. 52/2020 of Subramanyapura Police Station. In crime stage, the petitioner has been granted -5- NC: 2025:KHC:47039 CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025 HC-KAR bail by order dated 03.07.2020 and he has been released on bail. Subsequently, charge sheet has been filed for offences under Section 143, 144, 323, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. The petitioner remained absent and case against him has been split up. The petitioner has violated conditions imposed while granting bail. As the petitioner remained absent, case against him has been split up. The absence of the petitioner has caused delay in trial and disposal of the case registered against him. The petitioner remained absent for 4 years 11 months. The petitioner has not assigned any sufficient reasons for his absence or for his not appearing in the criminal case. So the petitioner stated to have involved in 8 criminal cases. The details of which are furnished by Learned Additional SPP, which noted above. If the petitioner is again granted bail, there are chances of he again absconding and committing similar offences. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:47039 CRL.P No. 12547 of 2025 HC-KAR Considering all the above aspects, the petitioner has not made out any grounds for grant of bail. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40