MR. SANTHOSH vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2200 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
MR. SANTHOSH
S/O LATE NARSIHMA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT DOOR NO. 580
MALE MAHADESHWARA TEMPLE
KAMAKSHIPALYA
MAGADI ROAD 560 079
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUYOG HERELE E., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH KAMAKSHIPALYA P S
REP BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU 560001
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S
528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
03.10.2024 IN S.C.NO.374/2022 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED XLV
ADD. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU AND
CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 451 AND 457 OF CR.P.C. (PRODUCED
AT DOCUMENT NO.1)
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs:
a. Set aside the impugned order dated 03.10.2024 in
S.C.No.374/2022 on the file of Learned XLV Add.
City Civil and Sessions Judge at bengaluru and
consequently allow the application filed by the
petitioner under section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C.
(produced at document no.1).
b. Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble
High Court may deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
2. The petitioner is accused in Crime No.124/2020
registered by Kamakshipalya Police Station for the
offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860, on the allegation that he caused
the death of his father and mother by smothering
them.
3. Separate proceedings have also been initiated
against the petitioner for the offence punishable
under Section 309 of the IPC in Crime No.117/2020
registered by Srirangapatna Police Station.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
4. In Crime No.124/2020, during the course of
conducting a mahazar at the scene of occurrence,
the Investigating Officer seized certain gold articles
found therein, as the petitioner had allegedly
attempted to portray the scene as one involving a
burglary. The said articles were seized under PF
No.89/2020 dated 08.07.2020.
5. The petitioner filed an application under Sections 451
and 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
seeking release of the said gold articles. The
application came to be rejected by the trial Court by
order dated 03.10.2024, principally on three
grounds: firstly, that the petitioner had not produced
all documents to establish his ownership of the gold
articles; secondly, that the documents produced by
him indicated that the articles had been purchased in
the name of Smt. Annapurna, whom the trial Court
considered to be the deceased mother of the
petitioner; and thirdly, that since the petitioner was
accused of causing the death of his parents, he
would be disqualified under Section 25 of the Hindu
Succession Act, 1956, from succeeding to their
estate, if the articles belonged to them. Challenging
the said order, the petitioner is before this Court.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
6. Sri. Suyog Herele E., learned counsel for the
petitioner, submits that the trial Court has proceeded
on an erroneous factual premise in treating Smt.
Annapurna, in whose name certain bills stand, as the
deceased mother of the petitioner. It is submitted
that Smt. Annapurna is the wife of the petitioner,
whereas his mother’s name is Saraswathamma.
7. Learned counsel further submits that the family was
facing severe financial distress and that the
circumstances surrounding the incident, including the
alleged suicide pact among the family members,
would have to be established during the course of
trial.
8. His submission is that the gold articles were
purchased by the petitioner and his wife from their
own funds and that the trial Court, having failed to
properly consider the documents produced, ought to
have allowed the application for release of the
articles.
9. Heard Sri. Suyog Herele E., learned counsel for the
petitioner, and Ms. Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP for
respondent No.1. Perused the papers.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
10. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the
trial Court has considered the bills produced by the
petitioner but has proceeded on the premise that
Smt. Annapurna, in whose name certain bills stand,
was the deceased mother of the petitioner. The
petitioner contends that the said premise is factually
incorrect and that Smt. Annapurna is his wife. The
name of the mother of the Petitioner, who the
petitioner is alleged to have murdered is
Sarswathama and not Annapurna, the trial Court’s
conclusion in this regard cannot be sustained.
However, it is also relevant to note that the bills
produced do not relate to all the gold articles seized
under PF No.89/2020. The mere production of bills in
respect of certain articles would not, by itself,
establish ownership of all the articles seized.
11. The application filed by the petitioner under Sections
451 and 457 of the CrPC required the trial Court to
consider the material produced in support of the
claim for release, the identity and ownership of each
of the articles sought to be released, and the
circumstances in which the articles came to be
seized. The trial Court was required to assess each of
the documents produced by the petitioner and record
reasons as to whether the each/any of the articles,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
could be released to him, subject to such conditions
as may be appropriate. The bills could not be treated
as conclusive proof of ownership; equally, they could
not be disregarded on the basis of an erroneous
identification of the person in whose name they were
issued.
12. Insofar as the bills standing in the name of Smt.
Annapurna are concerned, it is submitted that she is
the wife of the petitioner and not his deceased
mother. Since she has not filed an application
seeking release of the articles purchased in her
name, the question of directing release of those
articles in her favour does not arise for consideration
in the present proceedings. The petitioner’s claim, if
any, in respect of the articles covered by the bills in
his own name, would nevertheless require
consideration on its own merits.
13. The fact that the petitioner is accused of causing the
death of his parents and the question of his
disqualification from succeeding to their estate under
Section 25 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, are
relevant considerations if the articles are found to
belong to either of the deceased parents and the
petitioner claims them by way of succession.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
However, the said consideration cannot, without first
determining the ownership of the articles, be applied
indiscriminately to all the gold articles seized under
PF No.89/2020. The question of ownership and the
source of funds used for purchasing the articles
would have to be examined independently, without
treating the bills as conclusive proof in favour of the
petitioner.
14. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the impugned order dated
03.10.2024 requires to be set aside and the matter
remitted to the trial Court for fresh consideration.
While undertaking such consideration, the trial Court
shall examine each of the bills produced by the
petitioner, the articles to which each bill relates, the
source of funds used for their purchase and the other
material available on record. The trial Court shall not
treat the bills issued in the name of the petitioner as
conclusive proof of his ownership, but shall consider
them along with the other relevant circumstances. It
shall also determine whether any of the articles are
shown to belong to the deceased parents and, if so,
consider the legal consequences arising under
Section 25 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60128
CRL.P No. 2200 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010096412025
15. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the
following:
ORDER
allowed
i) Criminal petition is .
ii) The order dated 03.10.2024 in
S.C.No.374/2022 on the file of XLV Additional
City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru is set
aside. The matter is remitted to the XLV
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru for fresh consideration in accordance
with law and in the light of the observations
made hereinabove.
iii) In the event of an application being filed by the
wife of the petitioner, the same would have to
be separately considered in terms of the above.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
PRS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15