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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 16580

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
SUDHAKAR @ SUDHA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 11012/2025



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5286

CRL.P No. 11012 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11012 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

SUDHAKAR @ SUDHA S/O. DHARMA RAJ,

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/A #215/B,

1ST MAIN, 6TH CROSS, PRAKASHNAGAR,

RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560064.

ALSO AT PALURU VILLAGE,

CHITURU DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI.SHRIDHAR FOR SRI.PRASHANTH K.S, ADVOCATES)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION,

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

…RESPONDENT

VIJAYALAKSHMI

M KANKUPPI (BY SRI.RAHUL RAI, HCGP)

Digitally signed by

VIJAYALAKSHMI M THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT

KANKUPPI

BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN S.C NO.348/2023 (CR.NO.209/2016) OF

Date: 2026.02.03

10:18:15 +0530

THE SRIRAMAPURA POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED

LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE (CCH-64) BENGALURU

CITY FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147,

148, 363, 302 R/W. 34 OF IPC ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS

AS THE HON’BLE COURT MAY THINK FIT TO IMPOSE, IN THE

INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,

THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING AT DHARWAD BENCH,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5286

CRL.P No. 11012 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner has preferred this petition to

enlarge him on bail in S.C. No.348/2023 pending on the file

of the Court of 63rd Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge

(CCH 64), Bangalore City.

2. The charge sheet is filed for the offence

punishable under Sections 364 and 302 read with Section 34

of the Indian Penal Code against accused Nos.1 to 4,

showing accused No.3 as absconding. Petitioner is accused

No.2.

3. The law was set into motion on a complaint

lodged by one Ramesh C. against 5 to 6 unknown persons.

The material on record reveals that the petitioner was

initially granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge on

26.10.2018 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.8623/2018.

However, after he was released on bail, he absconded and

therefore warrant was issued against him. He was produced

under warrant on 28.09.2022 and is in custody since then.

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5286

CRL.P No. 11012 of 2025

HC-KAR

4. The learned counsel would submit that petitioner

had earlier filed two petitions before this Court, which were

dismissed and in the order dated 03.09.2024 passed in

Criminal Petition No.999/2024, this Court directed the trial

Court to expedite the trial. He submitted that there is no

progress in trial and therefore, the petitioner who is

languishing in judicial custody may be enlarged on bail.

Further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has

suffered injury to his leg and not able to move without the

help of a walking stick and he needs assistance and the rod

implanted in his leg has to be removed.

5. The Learned HCGP opposed the prayer for bail

contending that already leniency was shown to the petitioner

but he misused the liberty by absconding, due to which, the

trial has delayed. He contended that if the petitioner is

granted bail, once again, he will abscond and in that case

there will be further delay in trial.

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5286

CRL.P No. 11012 of 2025

HC-KAR

6. The petitioner has not furnished copy of the order

passed in Criminal Petition No.999/2024 disposed on

03.09.2024. Further, it is seen that the petitioner had earlier

preferred Criminal Petition No.3722/2023 to enlarge him on

bail. The said petition was dismissed by this Court vide Order

dated 12.06.2023. The dismissal of the said petition has not

been mentioned anywhere in the petition and also not

brought to the notice of the Court. While dismissing the said

petition, this Court has taken into consideration the

abscondance of the petitioner after he was granted bail and

also his medical condition. The jail authority was directed to

provide treatment to him whenever the need arises.

7. The Learned Sessions Judge has

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top