- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL BEFORE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2548 OF 2025 (A) C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2273 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2548/2025 BETWEEN: PRASANNA D. B. S/O SRI VIREESH AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT NO.5, NEAR MILK DIARY, T DODDAPURA, THALAKADU HOBLI, T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSORE 571 122. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.S.CHANDRAMOULI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RAJATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF SOLADEVANAHALLI P S BENGALURU REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SMT. SAROJAMMA W/O RAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.28, CHIKKABYLADAKERE, SHIVAKOTE POST, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, - 2 - BENGALURU CITY - 560 089. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B., ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI Y. KOTRESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER ENLARGING THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.604/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.132/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 103,140(1),61(2),238 R/W 3(5) OF BNS AND SEC.3(2)(B) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT. IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2273/2025 BETWEEN: NANDAN B., S/O BEERESH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO.18, 4TH CROSS 2ND MAIN, NEAR BY POLICE CHOWKI CHOUDESHWARI NAGAR LEGGERE, BENGALURU - 560 058. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SOLADEVANAHALLI P S REP BY LEARNED SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SMT. SAROJAMMA W/O RAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.28, CHIKKABYLADAKERE, SHIVAKOTE POST, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU CITY - 560 089. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - (BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B., ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI. Y.KOTRESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.09.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.1689/2025 AND CONSEQUENTIALLY ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.604/2025 (CR.NO.132/2025) OF SOLADEVANAHALLI P.S. PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED II ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 103,140(1),61(2),238 R/W 3(5) OF BNS AND SEC.3(2)(5) OF SC/ST POA ACT. THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 07.04.2026 FOR JUDGMENT COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THIS COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CAV JUDGMENT Criminal Appeal No.2548/2025 is filed by accused No.3 and Criminal Appeal No.2273/2025 is filed by accused No.2 seeking regular bail in Special Case No.604/2025 registered by Soladevanahalli Police Station in Crime No.132/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 140(1), 61(2), 236 read with Sections 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015. - 4 - 2. The case of the prosecution is: 2.1. that a complaint came to be filed on 26.04.2025 by one Smt. Sarojamma alleging that her son Chandrasekhar had been abducted by some unknown persons over a dispute regarding money and/or property. It is alleged that said Chandrasekhar was leading his life by running a cab. That he was married to one Vanaja for 18 years and they were blessed with two children. That about 3 to 4 months since, there was discord between said Chandrasekhar and his wife Vanaja due to which she was residing with her mother at Doddabylakere. That there was partition of ancestral property in Sy.No.78/9 in terms of which Chandrasekhar has been given 8 guntas of land. 2.2. that on 26.04.2025 at about 6.30 a.m. as a routine said Chandrasekhar had gone to have his tea to Doddabylakere on his Discover bike bearing registration No.KA-50-B-2970 and that while he was returning home at about 7.00 a.m. four unknown persons who had come in a white colour Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.KA-04-AD-8551 waylaid him near an under construction building of Maruthi Nursing College on Chikkabylakere-Raghavendra Dhamma Road and after assaulting him by hands, forcibly took him away in the said car leaving his bike at the spot, which incident has been witnessed - 5 - by one Muniraju, an acquaintance of the complainant who informed about the said incident to the complainant at about 7.30 a.m. When the complainant went to the spot found the bike lying near the said under construction building of Maruthi Nursing College. Thus, complaint is filed against four unknown persons. 3. Pursuant to the above complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.132/2025 initially for the offences punishable under Section 140(1) read with Section 3(5) of BNS Act, 2023. 4. At about 1.30 p.m. on 26.04.2025 said Chandrashekar was found dead with multiple injuries at Arekeredoddi. That the respondent No.1-Police conducted the investigation. Arrested four accused persons namely, Nagaraj- Accused No.1, Nandan B.-Accused No.2, Prasanna D.B.-Accused No.3, and the wife of said Chandrashekar, Smt.Vanaja-Accused No.4 on 27.04.2025. In addition to these accused persons, there were three children in conflict with law, J1 to J3 who were produced before the Juvenile Board. - 6 - 5. After the investigation, a charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 140(1), 61(2), 238 read with Sections 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC& ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 6. Column No.17 of the Charge sheet indicate the following: a). That the deceased Chandrashekar belonged to Bhovi (SC) community. He was married to accused No.4-Vanaja, for about 18 years. b). Accused No.1 a resident of Aalaganji Village, has been working in a petrol bunk at Doddabylakere since 8 years. c). Accused No.1 is related to accused No.3. Accused No.3 is a friend of accused No.2. Through accused No.3, accused No.1 become aquatinted with accused No.2. J1 to J3-Children in conflict with law are the friends of accused No.2. d). That about eight years since accused No.1 became aquatinted with accused No.4, who continued their contact through phone and WhatsApp. This was the cause for Chandrashekar to quarrel with accused No.1. Yet, accused No.1 continued to have relationship with accused No.4. - 7 - e). Accused No.4 had filed a complaint before Women's Police Station, North Division against Chandrashekar. Accused No.4 and Chandrashekar were living separately. f). Since, her husband Chandrashekar was an obstacle, accused No.4 had offered financial assistance to accused No.1 to eliminate him. Accordingly, accused No.1 had discussed with accused Nos.2 and 3 for over one month and with J1 to J3 hatched a plan watching over the movements of deceased Chandrashekar for a week. g). Accused No.1 had purchased two pepper sprays, an iron pipe, a steel stick and a knife about a month prior to the alleged incident and had kept the same in a Swift Dzire car bearing No.KA-04-AD- 8551, which was given by his brother in law Srikanta-CW.26 and had also prepared a letter as purportedly written by one Karthik-J2 to be kept in the pocket of deceased Chandashekar after the murder. h). On 26.04.2025, with the common intention of murdering said Chandashekar, A1 along with A2, A3 and J1 to J3 were waiting in the swift car at 7:00 AM in front of Maruthi Nursing College Building in Chikkabyalakere, Bengaluru City. When Chandrashekar came in his bike bearing No.KA-50-V- 2970, they stopped him and assaulted him by their hands, threatened him with the weapons which they - 8 - had brought and forcibly abducted him in the said car. i) Due to lack of space in the car A1 got off and asked A2, A3 and J1 to J3 to go to Channapatna and he would come by bus. j) Thereafter they went to Mysore road via Jalahalli, Sondekoppa, Tavrekere, where they bought a knife from the shop of Mandrup Gurjar who is cited as C.W.24. k). Thereafter they stopped the car at a vacant land in Arekeredoddi via Kannalu from Channapatna. When Chandrashekar tried to escape, accused No.2 assaulted him on the back of his head with an iron pipe, J2 took pepper spray from the car and sprayed it on Chandrashekar's face. l). Accused No.3 took the knife from the car and stabbed him near the neck and J1, J2 and J3 took the knife from accused No.3 and slit his throat and stabbed him near the stomach. m). And thereafter accused No.3 took the steel rod from the car and assaulted on his head and other parts of the body. n). When Chandrashekar fell down after assault, accused No.2 drove the car over his body two to three times. - 9 - o). Thereafter, accused No.3 picked up large stone that was lying there and dropped it on deceased Chandrashekar's face, murdering him on the spot. p). Accused No.1 took two gold rings from Chandrashekhar's hand and placed the letter written by J-2 in the deceased Chandrashekhar's pocket. q). On their way back, they threw away the knife, steel rod, iron pipe, pepper spray, and accused No.2's blood stained slippers on the road. From there, they went to Talakad in the same car, bought new clothes and burned the blood-stained clothes to destroy evidence. r). Accused No.1 picked up children in conflict with law at Channapatna circle and thereafter accused No.1, called accused No.4 through WhatsApp and informed her about Chandrashekhar's murder. s). Accused Nos.1 to 3 and J1 to J3 all went together to the service station of CW.25 in T. Narasipura to wash the car and destroy evidence. t). After that, they mortgaged one gold ring at Tushar Kumar's shop who is cited as CW.27 in Mysore and received Rs.26,000/-. Accused No.1 asked accused No.2 to distribute Rs.24,500/- amongst themselves and left the money in the dashboard. - 10 - 7. The trial Court has rejected the bail applications filed by the accused persons. Being aggrieved by the same, present appeals. 8. Sri. H.S.Chandramouli, learned Senior counsel appearing for Prasanna D.B-accused No.3 /appellant submitted; 8.1. that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. 8.2. that the prosecution has not prima facie established chain of circumstances indicating the guilt of the accused. 8.3. that there are contradictions in the final report with regard to the overt act attributed by the accused No.3, in that it is alleged that Accused No.3 herein had stabbed the deceased and had also dropped the stone on his head. While in the statement of the co-accused the overt act attributed is different. 8.4. that mere allegation of purchase of knife cannot be sufficient enough to implicate accused No.3, much less attributing assault by the said knife in the absence of any direct evidence. 8.5. that no test identification parade as required under law has been conducted. - 11 - 8.6. recovery of alleged incriminating materials have been made on the joint statements made by all the accused persons. Thus, joint recovery is not reliable. 8.7. presumption of accused being innocent untill proven guilty is available in the instant case as the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. 8.8. Adding of provisions of Section 3(2)(b) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is only to exaggerate the allegation, as no material evidence with regard to intention of the accused persons to humiliate the deceased are made out. 8.9. that accused No.4 has already been granted bail. As such the appellant/accused No.3 is entitled for similar relief on the ground of parity. Hence, seeks for allowing of the appeal in Crl.A.No.2548/2025. 9. Sri. Rakshith R, learned counsel appearing for Nandan/accused No.2 supplementing the submission made by learned Senior counsel submitted; - 12 - 9.1. that charge sheet has been filed and there is no requirement of any custodial interrogation. That the accused persons have been in confinement since 27.04.2025. 9.2. that the complaint was filed against unknown persons. The implication of the accused persons is only on the statement of accused No.1, which was recorded in the police station. The same cannot be relied upon. The joint recovery of incriminating materials have been done after lapse of two days which only indicate manipulation of evidence. Hence, seeks for allowing of the appeal in Crl.No.2273/2025. 10. Per contra, Smt. B.Pushpalatha, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor opposing the appeals submitted; 10.1. that prosecution has brought on record prima facie material evidence which indicate the guilt of accused persons who have conspired over a period of one month, which has resulted in death of the deceased, that abduction of deceased has been seen by Muniraju CW.4 at about 07:00 a.m. on 26.04.2025. It is upon the information furnished by him, mother of the deceased had lodged the complaint without any delay. - 13 - 10.2. Recovery of incriminating material evidence such as use of Swift car belonging to brother-in-law of accused No. 1, purchase of knife by accused No.2 which has been captured in the CCTV footage of CW.24's shop and payment of Rs.50/- through phone pay and the call records of accused No.1 strongly indicate the involvement of the accused persons in commission of offence. 10.3. that accused No.4 who was released on bail had intimidated and threatened the mother of the deceased resulting in she filing a complaint before the jurisdictional police. 10.4. That the prosecution is also taking action seeking cancellation of the said bail. That if the accused persons are granted bail there is every likelihood of they influencing, intimidating and threatening the witnesses and hampering the progress of the trial. Therefore, the accused persons shall not be granted bail. Hence, seeks for rejection of their appeals. 11. Heard. Perused the records. 12. Settled principle of law is that in a case involving circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to bring on record - 14 - prima facie evidence establishing the unbroken chain of links in commission of an offence, indicating only hypothesis of accused person committing the offence, and no other. 13. In the case of Ishwarji Nagaji Mali v. State of Gujarat reported in (2022) 6 SCC 609, the Apex Court at paragraph 7 has held as under; "7. ………….The High Court has not at all considered the material/evidence collected during the course of the investigation even prima facie and has directed to release Respondent 2 in such a serious offence of hatching conspiracy to kill his wife, by simply observing that as it is a case of circumstantial evidence, which is a weak piece of evidence, it is not legal and proper to deny bail to Respondent 2. Merely because the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence cannot be a ground to release the accused on bail, if during the course of the investigation the evidence/material has been collected and prima facie the complete chain of events is established. As observed hereinabove, while releasing Respondent 2 on bail, the learned Single Judge of the High Court has not at all adverted to and/or considered any of the material/evidence collected during the course of the investigation, which is a part of the charge- sheet". 14. In the instant case the material produced by the prosecution along with the final report against the accused persons for the offences alleged to have been committed by them are as under; - 15 - 14.1. CW4-Muniraju claimed to have seen some 4 to 5 persons forcibly dragging Chandrasekhar near an under construction building at about 7:00 a.m on 26.04.2025 That the said Muniraju is stated to have seen the bike of Chandrasekhar left behind at the spot from where he was picked by the said four persons. Soon thereafter he has informed the relatives of Chandrasekhar. Based on the said information, complaint has been filed by the mother of the deceased at 11.50 a.m. on 26.04.2025 after seeing the bike belonging to deceased Chandrasekhar left behind at the place where he was picked up. Accordingly, a case in Crime No.132/2025 came to be registered by the respondent-Police initially for the offence punishable under Section 140(1) read with Section 3(5) of BNS Act. 14.2. That on the same day, a case in Crime No.55/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103 and 238 of BNS Act, 2023 came to be registered in Sathanur Police Station, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara upon the complaint given by one Sri.Ningaraju-C.W.5 alleging that a body of a male aged about 30 to 35 years had fallen in the land near, Kurubarahalli Doddi, Arekattedoddi Village, Sathanur Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk. - 16 - 14.3. One of the items recovered from the dead body is 2 pages of writing containing purported signature of Karthik M who is stated to be J2. The FSL report of the questioned signature and questioned writing tallying with specimen signature and specimen writing of Accused No.2-Nandan. 14.4. Purchasing of knife from the shop of one Mandrup Gurjar- CW.24 at about 8.30 am of 26.04.2025 and paying Rs.50/- through phone pay i.e., from the account of Bhagyalakshmi enterprises, transaction ID-T2504260826226759075916, UTR No.943742591095 as well as CCTV footage recovered from the said shop depicting purchase of knife by Accused No.2. 14.5. Tracing of white Swift Dzire car bearing No.KA-04-AD- 8551 to the ownership of Srikanta H M-CW26 brother -in-law of accused No.1. 14.6. Statement of Ganesh Kumar-CW25, the owner of Ganesh Service Centre at T.Narasipura town regarding accused No.1 going to his water service centre at about 5.00 p.m on 26.04.2025 and having Swift Dzire car bearing No.KA-04-AD- 8551 washed and paying charges of Rs.350/- through GPay and screen shot of the transaction indicating payment of Rs.350/- - 17 - under UTR No.548244657965/QR in the name of one Srikanta H.M. 14.7. Recovery of gold ring from the shop of Tushar Kumar, CW.27 along with receipts and register extract of payment of Rs.26,000/- against pledging of 4.100 grms. of gold ring. 14.8. Bank statement of accused No.2 reflecting receipt of Rs.30,000/- from one Madhushree on 03.04.2025 which is traced through the account of one Nagaraj, Manjula and Bheemanna. 14.9. Call records pertaining to alleged calls from the phone number of accused No.1-Nagaraj- 9606234866 to the phone numbers of accused No.2-Nandana- 7411277753, accused No.3-Prasanna D.B-9353241145, accused No.4- Vanaja- 990998437. The perusal of the call record indicate alleged constant calls from the phone number of accused No.1 to the phone numbers of accused No.2 and 3 between 25.04.2025 and 26.04.2025 and the alleged timings and the tower locations. 14.10. The post mortem report indicate that the deceased has sustained 22 injuries and the death is stated to be due to shock - 18 - and haemorrhage. The nature of severe injuries and manner of inflicting indicate brutal attack on the deceased. The nature of injuries are as under; "1. Abrasion measuring 6.5cm x 4cm present over the forehead involving right eyebrow. 2. Abrasion measuring 2.5cm x 1cm present over the nose on right side. 3. Abrasion measuring 3cm x4cm present over the right cheek. 4. Abrasion measuring 4cm x 2cm present over the left cheek. 5. Incised wound measuring 2cm x 0.5cm x bone deep present 2cm in front of the left ear. 6. Laceration measuring 5cm x 0.5cm x bone deep present over the scalp on the back of head on left side. 7. Three parallel incised wounds measuring 6cm x 1cm x muscle deep, 7cm x 1cm x muscle Deep present over the front of the neck involving middle and left side, at the level of thyroid cartilage. They are directed outwards, upwards and backwards. Tallinn of the wounds seen on left side. 8. Incited wound measuring 11cm x 4cm x neck structures deep, involving the underling vein, trachea just below the thyroid cartilage present over the front and left side of the neck. It is directed outwards upwards and backwards. 9. Incised wound measuring 6cm x 1cm x muscle deep present on left side of the neck, 1cm below the above injury. - 19 - 10. An oblique incised wound measuring 5cm x 2cm x bone deep present over front of chest on the midline. 11. Six stab wounds measuring 1cm x 0.5cm x muscle deep to 1.2cm x 8 cm muscle deep present over the outer aspect of the neck on right side. Lower ends are blunt and upper ends are sharp. 12. Linear abrasion measuring 13cm x 1.2cm present over the front of chest on left side, involving left shoulder. 13. Multiple abrasions measuring 4cm x 5cm. 11cm x6cm, 3cm x 4cm, 8cm x7cm present over the front of chest and abdomen on left side. 14. Stab wound measuring 1 cm x 0.5cm x chest cavity deep present over outer aspect of the chest on left side just above the level of the nipple. 15. Abrasion measuring 3cm x4cm present on the outer aspect of the abdomen on right side. 16. Abrasions measuring 3cm x2cm, 3cm x4cm present over the outer aspect of right arm. 17. Multiple abrasions measuring 0.5cm x 1cm to 1cm x 1.5cm present overt right forearm and hand at places. 18. Abrasions measuring 11cm x 3cm, 7cm x 2.5cm, 8cm x3cm present over back of left shoulder and left arm. 19. Multiple abrasions measuring 1cm x0.5cm to 1cm x 2cm present over left forearm and hand at places. 20. Laceration measuring 3cm x 05cm x muscle deep present in the web space between right finger and little finger. 21. Multiple abrasions measuring 4cm x 6cm to 8cm x 13cm present over the back of the body. - 20 - 22. Multiple abrasions measuring 1cm x 0.5cm to 1.5cm x 2.5cm present over both lower limbs at places". 15. The injuries referred to above found on the body of the deceased as per Post Mortem report indicate the nature and gravity of offence. The punishment prescribed for the offence alleged if proved is imprisonment for life or death. 16. Though learned counsel for the appellants sought to treat the accused Nos.2 and 3 herein on the principles of parity in the light of accused No.4 -Smt.Vanaja having been released on bail, perusal of the said order dated 21.07.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1135/2025 granting bail in favour of accused No.4 indicate that the Court has taken into consideration her alleged role was only abettor or a conspirator and that she was not present at the scene of the offence and she did not participate in assaulting the deceased. 17. Also necessary to note that accused No.4 is stated to have threatened the complainant with dire consequences which has now resulted in registration of FIR against accused No.4 on 17.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 351(2) and 352 BNS, 2023. Learned Addl. SPP has also submitted that - 21 - steps are being taken to seek cancellation of bail on this count. No parity thus can be claimed by the appellants in the matter. 18. Perusal of the aforesaid circumstantial material evidence brought on record by the prosecution at this juncture indicate a prima facie completion of chain of circumstances. 19. On perusal of the aforesaid material and on consideration of submissions for the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the appellants have not made out a case for grant of bail at this juncture. 20. Hence, reserving liberty to the accused Nos.2 and 3, the appellants herein to seek grant of bail after recording of evidence of eye witness and other important witnesses, these appeals are dismissed. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15