SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 440548

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Shivashankar Amarannavar, J
MR CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY KARNATAKA BY – Respondent
CRL.P No. 11888 of 2025 | C.C.No.5706/2025 | CR.No.432/2024



Important Points

The matter pertains to a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for offences registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Subject

Criminal Law - Bail

Act Referred

Headnote

The petitioner, identified as accused No. 3, filed a petition under S. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) seeking bail in connection with crime No. 432/2024 registered at Avalahalli Police Station for offences punishable under S. 111, 305, and 331(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), currently pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District. The primary issue before the court is the eligibility of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner's counsel contended that there was a recovery of 19 articles of theft. Result: [The provided text is truncated and does not contain the final verdict].
Table of Content
1. application for bail under bnss and preliminary arguments regarding the recovery of stolen property. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

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

ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed by accused No. 3 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’) praying to grant bail in crime No. 432/2024 of Avalahalli Police Station registered for offence under Sections 111 , 305, 331(4) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’) pending in C.C. No. 5706/2025 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.

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

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that there is recovery of 19 articles of theft and out of

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top