- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6941 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SIDDHARATH @ SYCHO SIDDHA @ BORREGOWDHA S/O RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT 23, 10TH CROSS AMBEDKAR NAGAR, ULLAL UPANAGAR BENGALURU-560110. PERMANENTLY R/AT KUTAGAL VILLAGE AND HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DIST - 562159 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHEKARAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BYADARAHALLI POLICE STATION BENGALURU. NOW REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU HIGH COURT COMPLEX BANGALORE-560001 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.SOWMYA R, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/SEC.439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.145/2025, REGISTERED BY THE BYADARAHALLI POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC.189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2), 118(1), 109 OF BNS, 2023 ON THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN THE ABOVE CASE AND ETC. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.5 in Crime No.145/2025 of the respondent - Byadarahalli Police Station, is before this Court seeking regular bail for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2), 118(1), 109 and 329(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS Act') pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that, Naveena Kumar, who is taking treatment in the hospital had made his statement to the Head Constable 7625 of the respondent – police stating that he was residing along with his parents and doing the work of supplying the Gas Cylinders to the customers. The complainant and Chandrashekar @ Abhi are studying in S.S.Public School. The petitioner and others were known to them and they were trying to dominate the said area - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 by creating nuisance often. The complainant was not happy about their friendship and he was trying to avoid them. 3. Again, on the following day i.e., on 28.03.2025 at about 10.30 a.m., the injured made a phone call to the said Kiran as to why they had assaulted him. Being enraged by the phone call, the said Kiran formed an unlawful assembly along with his friends and assaulted the injured and his friends and caused injuries. Immediately, the injured was admitted to the Hospital. 4. Based on the statement made by the injured, a case came to be registered by the respondent – Police. The investigation is under progress. 5. Heard Sri.Shekarappa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Sowmya.R, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 6. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.5, the overt-act of the petitioner is not forthcoming in the complaint and his name is not mentioned in the complaint. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail as he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offences. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader tried to convince the Court by contending that even though the name of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the complaint, the persons, who have been arrested, have disclosed that he was present at the time of the incident and he had also assaulted the injured. Therefore, as the co-accused have confessed before the Police that he was present at the time of the incident, hence, the bail petition of the petitioner has to be rejected. 8. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments made in the complaint and remand application. On perusal of the complaint, the name of the present petitioner is not forthcoming, however, in the remand application, it is stated that four cases have been registered against him by two different Police Stations. The pendency of other cases may not be a ground to deny the bail. In the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 complaint, it is not stated as to how the present petitioner had assaulted the injured or others. When there is an absence of overt-act against the petitioner, denying him to grant bail would be an abuse of the process of law. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions. 9. In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.145/2025 of the respondent – Police, pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Bangalore Rural District, Bengaluru, on executing a 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, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required till filing of the charge sheet. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18283 CRL.P No. 6941 of 2025 b) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail. c) The petitioner shall not threaten nor tamper the prosecution witnesses. d) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Trial Court forthwith. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. SD/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50