- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 19998 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: B.LOKESH, ADVOCATE, KAR/1691/2010, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O MR. BASAVARAJ, R/A NO.5, LOTUS LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD, ANEKAL, BENGALURU 562 106. HAVING HIS LAW CHAMBERS AT NO.5, STB COMPLEX, NEAR CIVIL COURT, ATTIBELE MAIN ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN, BENGALURU- 562 106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI S.R RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI SATYANARAYANA S CHALKE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BANNERGHATTA POLICE STATION, ANEKAL SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU-560 083. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPT. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. 3. SRI LOKESHA C.S., AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O. MR. SHIVARAJU, POLICE CONSTABLE P.C.NO.62, BANNERGHATTA POLICE STATION, ANEKAL SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU- 560 083. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N JAGADEESHA, SPP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226, 227 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION READ WITH SECTION 528 OF THE BNSS, 2023 PRAYING TO (A) QUASHING THE INCLUSION OF THE PETITIONER’S NAME AS ACCUSED NO.7, IN CRIME NO.142/2026, DATED.09.06.2026 REGISTERED AT BANNERGHATTA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, AS PER ANNEXURE-C AND ALL PROCEEDINGS, ORDERS, AND ACTIONS TAKEN THEREUNDER INSOFAR AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before the Court seeking the following prayer: “(a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Direction or Order, quashing the inclusion of the Petitioner’s name as Accused No.7, in Crime No.142/2026, dated.09.06.2026 registered at Bannerghatta Police Station, Bengaluru, as per Annexure-C and all proceedings, orders, and actions taken thereunder insofar as they pertain to the petitioner; (b) Direct the Respondents to forthwith delete the Petitioner’s name from the array of accused in Crime No.142/2026, dated 09.06.2026 as per Annexure – C; (c) Award costs of this Petition to the Petitioner; and (d) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 2. Heard Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned senior counsel for Sri Satyanarayana S. Chalke, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor – 1 appearing for respondent No.1. Notice to respondent No.2 is not issued. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: The petitioner is drawn as accused No.7, who is said to be an advocate enrolled with the Karnataka State Bar Council. The issue is, registration of a crime in Crime No.142/2026, which comes to be registered on 09.06.2026. When the crime was registered, the name of the petitioner was not drawn as an accused. The fulcrum of the crime is, a Gym trainer getting murdered. The allegation is that, accused Nos.1 to 5 are said to be the supari killers, who were contacted and handed over a contract by accused No.6, one Prasad and alleged to have committed the act of murder of the said Gym trainer. 4. Learned State Public Prosecutor - 1 submits that the petitioner had an axe to grind that his daughter had an affair with the said Gym trainer. Be those submissions as it may. 5. The petitioner was not in the picture till that date. While filing a remand application before the concerned Court, the petitioner is drawn as accused No.7 and the remand of the petitioner is sought. It is then the matter comes up before this Court. On 06.07.2026, this Court had passed the following order: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 “Heard Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, a practicing advocate, is now in the dragnet of the crime on a very strange circumstance. A crime comes to be registered in Crime No.142 of 2026 for offences punishable under Sections 103 and 238 of the BNS alleging for the offence of murder. The petitioner was not the accused at the time when the crime was registered. A remand application comes to be filed by the Investigating Officer including the name of the petitioner on the following grounds: “…. …. …. “18. ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಕರಣ ೆ ಪಕರಣ ೆ ಪಕರಣ ೆ ಪಕರಣ ೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ ಂ!ೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ ಂ!ೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ ಂ!ೆ ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ ಂ!ೆ "ಾ "ಾ "ಾ "ಾ»wಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಕ'ೇಯ ಕ'ೇಯ ಕ'ೇಯ ಕ'ೇಯ ((((.((((.)))).**** ಯನು& ಯನು& ಯನು& ಯನು& ಪ+ೕ( ಪ+ೕ( ಪ+ೕ( ಪ+ೕ(, ((((.((((.)))).**** ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ. 19. ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಆೋಯು ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ೋ ೇ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಕೇಯ ಮತು3 ಮತು3 ಮತು3 ಮತು3 6ಾಸದ 6ಾಸದ 6ಾಸದ 6ಾಸದ ಮ7ೆಯ ಮ7ೆಯ ಮ7ೆಯ ಮ7ೆಯ ಅಕಪಕದ ಅಕಪಕದ ಅಕಪಕದ ಅಕಪಕದ ಇರುವ ಇರುವ ಇರುವ ಇರುವ ((((.((((.)))).**** ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಪ,-ೇ. ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಗಳನು& ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ ಸಂಗ/ಸ0ೇ ಾ1ರುತ34ೆ.” (Emphasis added) The reason is that, the house and the office of the petitioner abut each other and therefore, the CCTV footage will have to be examined. For examination of the CCTV footage, an advocate’s house which has a CCTV is now logged into the crime. There cannot be another illustration of gross misuse of the provisions of the law by the Investigating Officer of drawing an advocate or any citizen into the web of crime for examination of a CCTV footage. If this would be permitted, no house or person who has installed a CCTV in his house will be safe. Another circumstance for the petitioner to be dragged into the web of crime is that, the petitioner had appeared for accused No.1 who is now alleged of murder. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 Therefore, to examine the CCTV footage installed in the house and the office of the petitioner and also the reason that he has appeared for accused No.1, he has been dragged into the web of crime, prima facie, is a gross abuse of the process of the law. Learned State Public Prosecutor - 1 to secure instructions as to why the Investigating Officer should not be mulcted with exemplary costs for having dragged this petitioner, an advocate, into the web of crime, if it is only on the aforesaid reasons, apart from directing to conduct a departmental enquiry against the said Investigating Officer. In the light of the afore-made observations, further investigation, qua the petitioner, in Crime No.142/2026, shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing. Learned High Court Government Pleader waives notice for respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner on record to serve a copy of the petition papers upon the learned High Court Government Pleader, forthwith. List the matter on 16.07.2026, in the fresh matters list.” It is on the strength of Clauses 18 and 19 of the remand application, this Court granted an interim order on 06.07.2026. 6. Learned State Public Prosecutor – 1 again moved the matter on the score that there is more than what meets the eye in the case at hand. Therefore, the matter is reheard today. 7. Since Clauses 18 and 19 of the remand application have already spent themselves and several new evidence or - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35072 WP No. 19998 of 2026 material have sprung pursuant to the investigation according to the learned State Public Prosecutor – 1, in the fitness of things, it is appropriate that the petitioner would seek bail of whatever kind before the hands of the concerned Court. 8. With the afore-made observations, the writ petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 71