- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7025 OF 2025 (439(Cr.P.C.) / 483(BNSS) BETWEEN: PRAKASH S S/O LATE. SAKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.94, THIGALARAHALLI VILLAGE, KALLAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA - 562 117. (ADDRESS MENTIONED AS SHOWN IN REMAND APPLICATION) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH M R., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CCB (OCW) WEST (OLD KENGERI. P.S,) BENGALURU, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M M., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CR.NO.233/2017 OF CCB (OCW) WEST P.S., BENGALURU (OLD KENGERI P.S., BENGALURU), FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302, 201 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED I ACJM, AT BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.7 seeking for regular bail in Crime No.233/2017, registered by the Kengeri Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of Indian penal Code. Brief facts of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the complaint came to be registered by the respondent-Police Inspector stating that Venkatesh, who is arrayed as accused No.2, was in love with the wife of Yellappa. In furtherance of this relationship, he along with other accused persons allegedly committed murder of said Yellappa in order to take his and also keep her as kept mistress to accused No.2. 3. It is further stated that, however, the said Sangeetha who is the wife of the deceased Yellappa had affair with Ramesh. Accused No.2 again approached his friend with an intention to commit murder of the said Ramesh in order to bring back the said Sangeetha. It is further stated that they committed murder of Ramesh, thereafter, they have been - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 apprehended in some other case by the complainant. During investigation, they confessed before him regarding the commission of murder of two persons. The respondent–Police after conducing investigation, submitted the charge sheet. The present petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.7 is stated to have committed murder of Ramesh along with other accused. 4. Heard Sri Manjunath M.R, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Waheeda M.M, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.7 and is innocent of the alleged offences. The entire case is based on the circumstantial evidence. Though it is stated that accused No.7 held the hands of the deceased Ramesh at the time of committing murder, the fact remains that, the said picture has been narrated only by the other co-accused. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Thigalarahalli Village, Kanakapura Taluk - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 and he will abide the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition and grant him bail. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the present petitioner and along with other accused are involving in the commission of double murders. The present petitioner in order to facilitate accused No.2 Venkatesh to be closed with Sangeetha who was the wife of Yellappa, he along with others committed murder of Ramesh whom she allegedly kept as her paramour. 8. It is further contended that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Thus, she prays to reject the bail petition. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the record that the Inspector of Police lodged a complaint stating that, during investigation, the fact of the murder had been emerged from the statement of one of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 accused. Based on the said statement, the Investigating Officer conducted further investigation and submitted the charge sheet, wherein it is alleged that the present petitioner was involving in the commission of a heinous offence. 10. It is needless to say that the accused Nos.1 to 4 have already been acquitted in a similar case and the present petitioner is arrayed as Accused No. 7, who is standing on the same footing who have been acquitted in the said case. 11. It is also noted that although the alleged incident is stated to have occurred in the year 2003, the case was registered only on 07.06.2017. Therefore, I am of the opinion that, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner by imposing suitable conditions. 12. In the light of the observation 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.233/2017 of the respondent – Police, pending on the file of the I ACJM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bengaluru, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18316 CRL.P No. 7025 of 2025 only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail. b) The petitioner shall not threaten nor tamper the prosecution witnesses. c) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Trial Court forthwith. d) The Trial Court shall act upon the said operative portion and take necessary steps to issue release order after taking surety and also personal bond. 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 SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48, CT:SK