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) 26010

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S RACHAIAH
MR MUNIRAJU M – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 1960/2026



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16122 CRL.P No. 1960 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1960 OF 2026

(438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. MR MUNIRAJU M S/O. MUNIYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.125, 10TH MAIN,

MUTHYALA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 054

2. MR. ARJUN. M, S/O. MUNIRAJU. M,

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, Dig itally R/AT NO.125, 10TH MAIN, signed by

BANDAPPA GARDEN, PAVITHRA N MUTHYALAMMA NAGAR,

Location:

BENGALURU – 560 054 High Court of

Karnataka

3. MR. ARUN. M, S/O MUNIRAJU. M,

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.125, 10TH MAIN,

BANDAPPA GARDEN, MUTHYALA NAGAR,

BENGALURU – 560 054

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16122 CRL.P No. 1960 of 2026

HC-KAR

4. MR. VENKATSH. M, S/O MUNIYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.125, 10TH MAIN,

BANDAPPA GARDEN, MUTHYALA NAGAR,

BENGALURU – 560 054

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. USMAN P., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY YESHWANTHPURA P.S,

BENGALURU.

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP)

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT AN ANTICIPATORY BAIL AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.405/2025 REGISTERED BY YESHWANTHAPURA P.S., BENGALURU, FOR

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16122 CRL.P No. 1960 of 2026

HC-KAR

THE OFFENCES P/U/S 103(1), 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLIX ACJM, BENGALURU CITY.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court seeking

anticipatory bail in Crime No.405/2025 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending on the file of the learned XLIX Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City.

2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint

was lodged by the complainant, who is the sister of the deceased, Narasimha Rao Raju. Based on the said complaint, the respondent/police registered a case and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, the names of the present petitioners were

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16122 CRL.P No. 1960 of 2026

HC-KAR

disclosed. Hence, the respondent/police are conducting the

investigation, which is under progress.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the

petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the entire case is based on surmises and conjectures, allegedly fuelled by a vindictive motive on the part of the sister of the deceased. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioners be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. The petitioners undertake to abide by any conditions that may be imposed

by this Court in the event of their release on bail.

4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent/Police vehemently submitted that a complaint has been lodged against the petitioners and others alleging the commission of murder of the deceased, who is none other than the brother of the complainant. It is submitted that the allegations are

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16122 CRL.P No. 1960 of 2026

HC-KAR

punishable with death or imprisonment for life. In such circumstances, it is submitted that granting anticipatory bail would send a wrong message to society. Hence, the

petitioners are not entitled to the relief as prayed for. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective

parties and perused the averments of the complaint. It

appears from the records that omnibus allegations have been made against the petitioners to the effect that they have committed the murder of the deceased. However, no specific overt act has been attributed to each of the petitioners indi

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