- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11778 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. YELLAPPA TIGALA S/O.MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHINTHAMAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BABU, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE BY KADUGODI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE RURAL - 560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.R.PATIL, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CR.NO.76/2025 IN C.C NO.6019/2025 AND S.C NO.114/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE VI ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 109(2), 104, 61(2), 103(1), 109(1), 3(5) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 SANHITA, 2023 AND ON THE FILE OF THE KADUGODI POLICE STATION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the accused No.2 for enlargement on bail in S.C No.114/2025 pending trial before the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, (henceforth referred to as 'the Sessions Court') for the offences punishable under Sections 109(2), 104, 61(2), 103(1), 109(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the BNS, 2023'). 2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Sri Kishore Kumar was living with CW.2 - Smt. Satya Arundhati / Sathya Arundati and she had separated from her husband. It is stated that on 20.02.2025, the accused had asked CW.2 to visit their house at No.57, near Sri Yellamma temple, 4th Cross, Belthur Colony, Kadugodi, and when CW.2 and the deceased visited their house at about 11 a.m., all the accused assaulted the deceased and also CW.2 with long. The deceased - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 succumbed to the injuries while CW.2 suffered serious injuries. Based on the complaint filed by the brother of the deceased, the case in Crime No.76/2025 was registered by the respondent against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 109(2), 104, 61(2), 103(1), 109(1), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The case was thereafter committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court in terms of the order dated 03.06.2025, took cognizance of the offences against the accused Nos.1 to 3 and issued a direction to the concerned Jail Superintendent to produce the accused Nos.1 and 2 from Judicial Custody through video conference before the Court on the next date of hearing and issued summons to accused No.3. An application was filed by the petitioner / accused No.2 under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), which was rejected by the Sessions Court in terms of the order dated 14.07.2025. 3. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations made against the petitioner are primarily directed against the accused No.1 and not against the accused No.2. He also submitted that CW.2 is the wife of the petitioner and that it is the accused No.1, who assaulted the deceased with a long. He also assaulted CW.2. He, therefore, submits that the Sessions Court failed to consider that there was no overt act committed by the petitioner/accused No.2 and hence, the Sessions Court must have favourably considered the application of the petitioner for bail. 5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the deceased was the paramour of wife of the petitioner. He submits that the deceased and CW.2 went to the house of the accused on 20.02.2025, where the accused No.1 and the petitioner assaulted the deceased as well as CW.2. He, therefore, submits that there is enough material to justify a prima facie case against the petitioner and hence, prays that the petition be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. 7. The petitioner has been in custody from 21.02.2025. The only eye witness to the incident was CW.2, who is the wife of the petitioner. It is now stated by the learned High Court Government Pleader that CW.2 has expired. CW.1 was not an eyewitness, but the brother of the deceased, who had lodged the complaint after coming to know about the murder of the deceased. Except these two witnesses, all other witnesses are chance witnesses and therefore, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail. Hence, the following : ORDER Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner - accused No.2 is ordered to be released on bail in S.C. No.114/2025 pending trial before the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21940 CRL.P No. 11778 of 2025 i). The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with one local surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court. ii). The petitioner shall not tamper / influence the prosecution witnesses. iii). He shall appear before the Sessions Court on all dates of hearing without fail, unless exempted by the Sessions Court for any genuine reason. iv). The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court without its prior permission till the disposal of the case against him. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4