IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7611 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. BHAGYA W/O NARASIMHAMURTHY K R AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT KURUBARANETTU (VALMIKI NAGARA)

SULIBELE TOWN HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-562 159. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJU T A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI SULIBELE POLICE STATION Location: HIGH BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT COURT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.No.181/2023 OF SULIBELE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 201, 202 READ WITH 34 OF IPC, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN S.C.No.219/2024.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section

483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.181/2023 of Sulibele Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 202 r/w 34 of IPC pending on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District in S.C.No.219/2024.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent / State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Accused Nos. 2 and 4 have already been granted bail and accused No.3 is a juvenile offender. He further submits that the circumstances against this petitioner are last seen by CW.4 and CW.5, who have already examined and supported the case of the prosecution. Another circumstance is recovery of a key kept in a switch board of house, clothes, mop and towel at the instance of the petitioner. The motive alleged against the petitioner is regarding division of the property. Already 11 witnesses are examined and in charge sheet total witnesses cited are 38. The witnesses are not attending the Court and since last four months only one witness has been examined. The petitioner is a woman. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that the case involves a double murder. The petitioner is daughter- in-law of two deceased persons. The voluntary statement of the petitioner itself clearly indicates the overt acts of her assaulting both the deceased persons. The trial is in progress. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there are chances of she tampering with the prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed for rejection of the petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

6. Petitioner/accused No.1 is the daughter-in-law of two deceased persons namely Muniramakka and Ramakrishnappa. The husband of petitioner had borrowed money and in order to hide from persons who lent money, he had left the house and this petitioner had secured him stating that after selling the property the loan can be repaid. The petitioner asked her in-laws for sale of the property and they did not agree and therefore, the petitioner and other accused conspired to kill both the deceased persons. In furtherance of the conspiracy, on 09.12.2023, accused persons assaulted Muniramakka when she was preparing food in the kitchen with iron rod and committed her murder. Thereafter when her father-in- law Ramakrishnappa came to the house, he was assaulted with iron rod by this