IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14608 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SRI PRAVEEN NAYAK K A @ PRAVEEN SON OF ANANDA.K AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT KALAVARA VILLAGE, NANDI HOBALI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA -562101.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI RENY SEBASTIAN., ADVOCATE)

Dig itally signed by AND:

PAVITHRA N

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA Location: BY CHIKKABALLAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION High Court BENGALURU of REPRESENTED BY SPP Karnataka HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C (U/S

483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SC.NO.42/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.22/2025 OF CHIKKABALLAPURA RURAL P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT CHIKKABALLAPURA, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(2), 61(1)(b), 190, 238 OF BNS.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is accused No.1 seeking regular bail in SC.No.42/2025 pending on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura (Crime No.22/2025 of Chickballapura Rural Police Station) for the offences punishable under Sections 103(2), 61(1)(b), 238 and r/w 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The allegation made in the charge sheet is that the elder brother of the complainant, namely, Subhash, was in love with CW.5, Indushree, hence, he married her without the consent of both the families. A child was born to them. Later, Subhash kept CW.5 in the house of his relative-Ramanjinappa at Rajaghatta for the purpose of bringing up his child. At that time, there was a dispute between Subhash and CW.5 in respect of illicit relationship of the said Subhash with another woman. Later, CW.5 had informed her younger brother-Manoj and requested him to advise Subhash. Accused No.3 had advised the said Subhash, who is his brother-in-law. However, it did not work out. Thereafter, it is alleged that CW.5 had informed accused Nos.1 and 2 to advise Subhash to be corrected her matrimonial life. Accordingly, on 02.01.2025, accused Nos.1 and 2 warned Subhash to take care of CW.5. Later, the said Subhash learnt that CW.5 was talking with accused Nos.1 and 2 and also they had cordial relationship with each other. The said Subhash was angry and he has given warning to accused Nos.1 and 2 that he would take away their lives.

3. On 03.02.2025, accused Nos.1 and 2 discussed among themselves that it would be trouble for them if they leave Subhash alive. Then, they decided to commit his murder. It is alleged that they committed murder of the deceased with the help of other accused. A complaint came to be registered by the brother of the deceased before the respondent/police. The respondent/police have registered a case against seven members, after conducting the investigation, submitted the charge sheet.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in the present case. It is contended that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. It is further submitted that the material witnesses, namely CWs.3 to 5, have given their statements which are contradictory in nature and there are several improvements and embellishments. The petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and that there are no criminal antecedents against him. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. The petitioner will abide by the conditions in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, the learned Senior Counsel prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State vehemently submitted that the prosecution has clearly established the i