Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14726 (KAR)

LAKSHMAN @ LACHI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/14676/2025 · 2026-03-04

S Rachaiah

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14676 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. LAKSHMAN @ LACHI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O LATE NAGARAJ, R/AT NO 01, “C” BLOCK, KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD LAYOUT, BEHIND ARMY SCHOOL, NAGARESHWARA NAGENAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 077. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 BY KOTHANUR PS, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR BEEDI, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASAMY R, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR NO.51/2025 OF KOTHANUR PS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE IN SC NO.1019/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1), 238, 311, 309(6) OF BNS 2023 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.451/2024 filed by the Respondent-Police for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 238, 311, 309(6) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Factual matrix of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was heavily burdened by debt and, he wants to clear it. The deceased was residing in the vicinity where the petitioner was residing. The petitioner was noticing that the deceased being an old lady was wearing gold ornaments heavily and she was moving in and around the area. It is further stated that the petitioner in order to gain the jewellery unlawfully, entered in to the house of the old woman, strangulated and killed her. After killing her, he had stolen the gold ornaments. In order to causing - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 disappearance of the evidence, he has wrapped the deadbody, transported it in an auto rickshaw, and threw the deadbody. To ensure that she has died, the petitioner had touched and subsequently, he assaulted her with the brick on her head and killed her. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered by CW1. 3. Based on the complaint, the respondent police have registered a case in Cr.No.51/2025 against the petitioner. After completion of investigation, submitted the charge sheet for the aforesaid offences. 4. Heard Sri. Rakshith R, learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Rangaswamy R. learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. Though, the Investigating Officer projected that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 petitioner had killed the deceased for gain, the fact remains that, the bills produced by the Investigating Officer to show that the ornaments were purchased by the deceased, the fact remains that the bill were standing in the name of CW1. Moreover, the Investigating Officer demonstrated that the petitioner had pledged the ornaments after committing theft. However, he had not produced any receipt for having pledged the ornaments with the pawn brokers. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a married man having a wife and children. He has responsibility to take care of them. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.03.2025. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions which would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. Makings such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 6. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader respondent - State vehemently submitted that though, the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, there are witnesses for last seen theory. The gold ornaments on the dead body were identified by CW1. The deceased had been killed for gain by the petitioner, he has committed heinous offence. Hence, he is not entitled for bail. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to dismiss the petition. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint and the charge sheet, it is noted that, the petitioner is a sole accused in this case. However, the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is the duty of the Court to protect the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of the accused/offender when the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 It is needless to state that when the bail application in respect of case where the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence has to be dealt with differently from the case where the entire case is based on the evidence of eye witnesses. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant him bail without adverting to the merit of the case. 8. Hence I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. This Criminal Petition is allowed. ii. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety to the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence, till disposal of the present case. iv. The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13081 CRL.P No. 14676 of 2025 v. The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses. In case, if any of the conditions mentioned above are violated by the petitioner, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to take appropriate steps to file necessary application for cancellation of the bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE JS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27