SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 440152

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
SRI RAVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 16353/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.16353 OF 2025

(439(1)(b)(Cr.PC)/483(1)(b)(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAVI

S/O. SRI. NARASIMHAIAH

AGED 51 YEARS, R/AT. NO.161,

4TH 'B' CROSS, RAMAIAH BADAVANE

PEENYA 2ND STAGE,

BENGALURU - 560 058

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by

LAKSHMINARA YANA

MURTHY RAJASHRI

STATE OF KARNATAKA

Location: HIGH

COURT OF BY CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH POLICE,

KARNATAKA

BENGALURU,

THROUGH SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. B. PUSHPALATHA, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(1)(b) OF CR.PC (FILED U/S

483(1)(b) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO RELAX/MODIFY CONDITION NO. (IV) OF THE ORDER OF GRANT OF REGULAR BAIL DATED 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 PASSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN CRL.P NO.6597/2019 DIRECTING THAT (iv) THE PETITIONER SHALL NOT LEAVE THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIAL COURT WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION, TILL THE CASE REGISTERED AGAINST HIM IS DISPOSED OF I.E, CRIME NO.52/2019 OF VIJAYANAGAR SUB DIVISION, POLICE STATION BENGALURU CITY, NOW CURRENTLY INVESTIGATION TRANSFERRED TO CCB, BENGALURU (NOW REGISTERED AS SPL.CASE NO.1054/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-1) FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 365, 120B, 146, 147, 341, 342, 384, 395, 307 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 7 OF ARMS ACT AND SECTION 3 OF KCOC ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO LEAVE THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIAL COURT.

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

439(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. and Section 483(1)(b) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') praying to relax condition No.(iv) of the order dated

20.11.2019 passed in Crl.P.No.6597/2019.

2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for petitioner and learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would contend that condition No.(iv) is causing hindrance on the petitioner in traveling to Krishnagiri District, Tamilnadu to attend civil litigation, wherein his wife is a party i.e., in O.S.No.10084/2014 and O.S.No.100145/2015. With this, he prayed to relax the condition.

4. Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has not violated condition No.(iv) till date.

5. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

6. The petitioner is accused No.1 facing trial for offences under Sections 365, 120(B), 146, 147, 341, 342, 384, 395, 307, 149 of IPC and Sections 3, 27 of the ARMS Act and Section 3 of KCOC Act, pending in Spl.Case No.1054/2019 on the file of the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. The petitioner has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 20.11.2019 passed in Crl.P.No.6597/2019, the said bail has been granted subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against him is disposed of.

7. The petitioner is seeking relaxation of condition No.(iv). There is no allegation that the petitioner violating the said condition. The said condition sought to be relaxed on the ground that the wife of the petitioner is party to two suits pending in Krishnagiri District, Tam

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top