IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 13093 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. MANIKANTA N S/O SRI NAGENDRA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT 1^ST CROSS HALLADAKERI VILLAGE NANJANGUD TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 301. 2. MAHENDRA SHETTY A S S/O LATE SANNA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA R/AT AMBALE VILLAGE MURTHY RAJASHRI PRESENTLY R/AT VINAYAMARGA Location: HIGH COURT OF HOUSING BOARD KARN ATAKA NANJANGUD TOWN MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 301.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI GAURAV SUBRAMANYAM, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NANJANGUD RURAL P.S MYSURU DISTRICT REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALRUU – 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) Cr.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN S.C.No.67/2025 OF THE RESPONDENT No.1 NANJANGUDU RURAL POLICE STATION IN CR.No.191/2024 MYSURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103(1), 111(2)(a), 61(2), 49, 3(5) OF BNS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE IV ADDL.

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT MYSURU.

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 Nos.3 and 4 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.191/2024 of Nanjangud Rural Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 103(1), 112(2)(a), 61(2), 49 read with 3(5) of BNS pending in S.C.No.67/2025 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru.

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

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that there are no eye witnesses to the incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. There is recovery of auto rickshaw and mobile at the instance of petitioner No.1/accused No.3. The rod alleged to have been used has been recovered at the instance of accused No.2. As per column 17 of the charge sheet, the allegation of assault on the head of deceased with iron rod is by accused No.2. The death intimation indicates that deceased sustained injuries in a road traffic accident. Charge sheet is filed and the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that there is recovery of passenger auto, mobile phone from petitioner No.1/accused No.3 and passenger auto and mobile phone from accused No.2. Petitioner No.1/accused No.3 is involved in another case registered in Crime No.87/2025 of Nanjangud Town Police Station. The PM report indicates that deceased has sustained 15 injuries and death is due to head injury sustained. The offence alleged against the petitioners is a heinous offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. If the petitioners are granted bail, there is a threat to the prosecution witnesses. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

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

6. As per column-17 of the charge sheet, the accusation is that accused Nos.1 to 5 conspired to kill the deceased – Nanjunda Swamy and in furtherance of the said conspiracy when deceased Nanjunda Swamy was going on bike, they stopped him, accused No.2 held him and at that time, accused Nos.3 and 4 assaulted him with steel rod on his body and accused No.2 took steel rod from accused No.4 and assaulted on the head of deceased Nanjunda Swamy and stabbed him with a screwdriver on his left knee. The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Except recovery at the instance of petitioner No.1, there are no other circumstances. As the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstance at t