G.M.MOHAN vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 17 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1460 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

G.M.MOHAN
S/O MAHALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT VILLA D.1, CHAITHANYASAMARPAN,
WHITE FIELD, HOSAKOTE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560067
...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT. BHANUPRIYA, ADV.)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KADUGODI POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU-560001

2. PRAVEEN
S/O BASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT NEAR CLOUD-9
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
GUTTUR VILLAGE,
HARIHARA TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT, PIN-577601
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1,
SRI. RAMANAN S., ADV. FOR R2.)
















Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: High Court
of Karnataka

- 2 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY II ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU RURAL
DISTRICT, IN CRL.MISC.NO.1498/2026 DATED 24.08.2026
AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN CRIME
NO.247/2026 OF KADUGODI POLICE STATION FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCE U/S 61(2), 103(1), 238 R/W 3(5) OF BNS
AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST ACT.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 21.09.2026 AND COMING ON FOR
"PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS" THIS DAY, THE COURT,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CAV JUDGMENT

1. Accused No.1/appellant-G.M Mohan S/o
Mahalingappa has preferred the appeal against the Order
passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
Rural District, Bengaluru, in Criminal Miscellaneous
No.1498/2026 dated 24.08.2026.

2. On the basis of the complaint filed by one
Raghavendra H., Kadugodi Police have registered the case in
UDR No. 21/2026 under Section 194(3)(iv) of BNSS. In this
complaint, the complainant Raghavendra has suspected
accused Nos.1 and 2 as to the cause of death of deceased child.
However, the concerned police have not registered the case
against them. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have obtained anticipatory
bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No.711/2026 on the file of Prl.

- 3 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru
dated 24.04.2026. Thereafter, on the basis of the complaint
filed by CW1-Praveen, Kadugodi Police have registered the case
in Crime No.247/2026 against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the
offences punishable under Section 103(1), 238 read with
303(5) of BNSS and submitted the FIR to the Court on
05.06.2026. After registration of the case against the accused,
in Crime No.247/2026, the Investigating Officer has submitted
a requisition to the Magistrate for cancellation of bail. Accused
Nos.1 and 2 have filed application under Section 480 of BNS for
release them on bail before the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. Same came to
be rejected on 05.06.2026. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 and 2
were arrested and they were remanded to the judicial custody.
Accused No.2-H.Priyanka filed an application under Section 483
of BNSS, 2023 before the Prl. District and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru in Criminal Miscellaneous
No.1317/2026. Same came to be allowed on 09.07.2026.
Accordingly, accused No.2-Priyanka H., was released on bail.

3. The bail application was filed by accused No.1 the
appellant herein, under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 before the
II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural

- 4 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


District, Bengaluru in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1498/2026.
Same came to be rejected on 24.08.2026. Being aggrieved by
this order appellant/accused No.1 has preferred this appeal.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Sri Tomy Sebastian, would
submit that the appellant is innocent and he has not committed
any offence as alleged against him. There are no ingredients
for the offence under Section 103(1) of BNS. The appellant is
arrested on 05.06.2026. Investigation is completed. Charge-
sheet is already filed against the accused. Accused is not
required for investigation. Accused No.2 is already released on
bail by the Sessions Court. There is an abnormal delay in filing
the complaint. After lapse of 70 days, the complainant has
lodged a complaint, which is not properly explained by the
prosecution. The appellant being a biological mother has
informed her brother about the illness of the baby and
requested him to inform the complainant. Since there was no
cordial relationship with the complainant, the complainant has
lodged false complaint against the accused. As per inquest
mahazar, there were only scar injuries on the face and blood
clots in the index finger and no one noticed any injuries on the
abdomen. Hence, it is clear that the complainant and
interested person have manipulated the post-mortem report. It

- 5 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


is very surprising that before issuing the post-mortem report to
the police, the husband of accused No.2, who was neither the
complainant nor Investigating Officer, brought the post-mortem
report on 04.04.2026 and found something strange. Even his
sister advised him to lodge a complaint. He has not chosen to
lodge a complaint up to 04.06.2026. As such, it is clear that the
complainant has manipulated the documents and foist the false
case against the accused/appellant. As per the complainant, he
`got the post-mortem report on 04.04.2026. But neither the
complainant nor the police, have suspected anything and
complainant has lodged a complaint after consultation with his
sister at UK. Hence, it is clear that they have manipulated the
post-mortem report and falsely filed the complaint. As per
records, the present complainant had filed a complaint on
25.03.2026 itself and requested the police to investigate the
matter but there is no reference as to same either in UDR, in
the complaint dated 04.04.2026 or in the remand application.
Nowhere the Investigating Officer has whispered about the said
complaint dated 25.03.2026. Hence, it is clear that the
Investigating Officer has manipulated the documents and
falsely implicated the appellant in this case. Further it is
submitted that appellant and complainant had filed a mutual
consent petition for dissolution of their marriage. But the

- 6 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


complainant had refused to give consent before the Court at
Mysuru. As such, accused No.2 has filed another petition for
divorce before the Family Court at Bengaluru and summons
was served to the complainant/husband on 02.06.2026. As a
counter blast, the complainant has registered a case against
accused No.2. It is further submitted that in respect of the
very same complaint, the brother of this appellant had filed a
complaint and same was registered in UDR No.21/2026. On
that basis complaint, police have started harassing the accused,
as such the accused have approached this Court in Criminal
Miscellaneous No.711/2026 and the Court has granted the
anticipatory bail. On that basis, appellant and accused No. 1
have complied the conditions by furnishing surety and co-
operated with the police for enquiry. The police have recorded
their statement and have also taken the custody of the vehicle
in which the accused with baby, travelled lastly. But no
incriminating evidence were available. As such police have not
converted the said case. However, on the influence of the
complaint, the respondent police have registered the case and
arrested this appellant and after investigation, police have
produced the accused with remand application seeking his
judicial custody. Hence, the appellant is not required for
further investigation. Further, it is submitted that the cause of

- 7 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


death shows as suffocation on a severe lack of oxygen reaching
the organs and brain. Since there were no injuries over the
neck or nose part, the death might have happened due to
putting AC in the car or in the house or for other reasons. But
the husband who is having the enmity since he has not agreed
for divorce and is residing separately, the complainant has
foisted a false case and by influencing the doctor through his
sister who is serving in UK has taken the post mortem report
from the hospital and succeeded in manipulating the same and
filed the complaint after lapse of 70 days. Hence, the story of
the prosecution is doubtful and liable to be rejected. As per the
story of the prosecution, accused no. 1 insisted the baby to eat
ice cream which has fallen on the handrest in the car, in anger
he had assaulted on the baby with his left hand elbow which
caused injuries and resulted in the death of the baby and
accused No.2 was not present when the incident took place.
But the trial Court has observed that accused No. 2 confessed
that accused No.1 has committed the murder. Hence, it is clear
that the Session Judge, without applying mind has erroneously
rejected the bail application filed by this appellant. The alleged
confession statement of co-accused before Investigating Officer
is not admissible against this appellant. Admittedly, there were
no eyewitness to this incident. There were no external injuries

- 8 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


over the body. The entire case of the prosecution is doubtful.
The case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial
evidence. There are no clinching evidence to connect the
appellant with the crime. There is no motive alleged against
this appellant. The appellant is ready to abide by the conditions
which may be imposed by this Court. On all these grounds
sought for allowing the application.

5. To substantiate his argument he relied on the
decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NAGENDRA SAH
v. STATE OF BIHAR reported in (2021) 10 SCC 725 .

6. On the other hand, learned Addl. SPP, Smt. Rashmi
Jadhav has submitted that the trial Court has properly
appreciated the material on record and absolutely that there
are no materials to interfere with the impugned order passed
by the appellate Court. Further, she would submit that though
the name of accused No.1 was shown in the UDR, the
concerned police have failed to register the case against them.
The inquest panchanama also discloses the names of these
accused. Since the concerned Investigating Officer has not
registered the case against these accused, after receiving this
complaint from brother of CW1, the Investigating Officer has
been suspended and Disciplinary Enquiry is also initiated

- 9 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


against him and because of the negligence on the part of the
Investigating Officer, case was not registered for 70 days. The
Investigating Officer has collected sufficient materials to file
charge-sheet against the accused for the alleged commission of
offences. The post-mortem report reveals that the death is due
to combined effect of asphyxia, as a result of obliteration of
airway and blunt trauma to the abdomen sustained. Further
opinion of the Senior resident of Department of Forensic
Medicine and Toxicology also reveals that death is due to
asphyxia, as a result of obliteration of airway and blunt trauma
to the abdomen sustained. On all these grounds sought for
dismissal of the appeal.

7. The statement of objection to the appeal is filed by
respondent No.2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has
reiterated the averments made in the statement of objection
Further, accused No.2 has clearly stated that accused No.1 has
confessed before her that he assaulted Venilla and murdered
her. Accordingly, it is sought for dismissal of the appeal.

8. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the
following points arise for my consideration:

- 10 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


1. Whether the appellant has made out ground to
interfere with the impugned order passed by
the trial Court?
2. What order?

9. My answer to the above points are:
Point No.1: in the negative;
Point No.2: as per final order
Regarding Point No.1:

10. I have examined the materials placed before the
Court. On the basis of the complaint filed by Raghavendra H,
Kadugodi Police registered case in UDR No.21 of 2026 under
Section 194(2)(iv) of BNSS, 2023. In the complaint filed by
Raghavendra, the complainant has suspected the prime person
Mohan G.M. as accused No.1 and Priyanka H who is the mother
of the child as accused No.2. Though the complainant has
suspected the name of Mohan G.M. and Priyanka H, Police have
not registered case as Crime, instead registered the case in
UDR No.21 of 2026. After filing UDR report, Mohan G.M. and
Priyanka H., have obtained anticipatory bail in Cri. Misc.No.711
of 2026 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Bangalore Rural District dated 24.04.2026, pertaining to UDR
No.21 of 2026. Thereafter, on the basis of the complaint filed
by CW1 Praveen, Kadugodi Police have registered case in Crime

- 11 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


No.244/2026 against accused 1 and 2 for offences punishable
under Sections 103(1), 238 read with 303(5) of BNSS, 2023
and submitted FIR to the Court on 5.06.2026. After
registration of this case, the investigating officer submitted
requisition to the Magistrate for cancellation of bail. Accused 1
and 2 have filed Application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023
before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural
District for releasing them on bail and the same came to be
rejected on 05.06.2026. Thereafter, accused 1 and 2 were
arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Accused No.2-
Priyanka H., filed application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023
before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore
Rural District in Cri. Misc. No.1317 of 2026 and the same came
to be allowed on 9.07.2026. The bail application filed by
accused No.1 under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 before the II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District
in Cri.Misc.No.1498 of 2026, came to be rejected on
24.08.2026. Being aggrieved by this order, the
appellant/Accused No.1, has preferred the present appeal.

11. On thorough investigation, investigating officer
submitted charge-sheet against the accused No.1-G.M. Mohan
and accused No.2-Priyanka H, for offences punishable under

- 12 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2) read with 3(5) of BNSS 2023 and
Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

12. In column 17 of the Charge-sheet, it is stated as
under:
"
F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ CAPÀt-14gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ ¸ÁQë-1 ²æà ¥À«Ãuï ©., gÀªÀgÀÄ
¥Àj²µÀÖ eÁwAiÀÄ ¨sÉÆë G¥ÀeÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀªÀgÁVzÀÄÝ, F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ªÀÄÈvÉ PÀÄ. ªÉ¤ß¯Áè,
ªÀAiÀĸÀÄì 5 ªÀµÀð 4 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ, d£Àä ¢£ÁAPÀ 04/11/2020, gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÁQë-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
CAPÀt-12gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ J-2 DgÉÆævÉ ²æêÀÄw ¦æAiÀiÁAPÀ gÀªÀgÀ
ªÀÄUÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀÄÈvÉ ¸ÀºÀ ¥Àj²µÀÖ eÁwAiÀÄ ¨sÉÆë G¥ÀeÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
¸ÁQë-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆævÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ 22/02/2007 gÀAzÀÄ «ªÁºÀªÁVzÀÄÝ,
EªÀjUÉ PÀÄ. E¶PÁ, ªÀAiÀĸÀÄì 18 ªÀµÀð, ªÀÄvÀÄÛ F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ªÀÄÈvÉ PÀÄ. ªÉ¤ß¯Áè JA§
E§âgÀÄ ªÀÄPÀ̽gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. CAPÀt-12gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ J-1 DgÉÆæ ²æà ªÉÆúÀ£ï
f.JA. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆævÉ ²æêÀÄw ¦æAiÀiÁAPÀ gÀªÀgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀgÀ¸ÀàgÀ ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ
¸ÉßûvÀgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. J-1 DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ ¸ÁQë-48 ²æêÀÄw ZÀAzÀ£Á gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß
«ªÁºÀªÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÁQë-48 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-1 DgÉÆæUÉ ªÀÄÆgÀÄ d£À ªÀÄPÀ̽gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. J-1
DgÉÆæ PÀÄgÀħ eÁw (¥ÀæªÀUÀð-2J)UÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆævÉ ¨É¸ÁÛgï eÁw (¥ÀæªÀUÀð-
1J)UÉ ¸ÉÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
¢£ÁAPÀ 27/11/2025 gÀAzÀÄ J-1 DgÉÆæ d«ÄãÀÄ «ZÁgÀªÁV ¸ÁQë-55
²æà gÁWÀªÉÃAzÀæ ºÉZï. gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÁ¸ÀªÁVgÀĪÀ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ, gÁªÀĪÀÄÆwð£ÀUÀgÀ,
CPÀëAiÀiï £ÀUÀgÀzÀ°ègÀĪÀ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ §AzÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¨sÉÃnAiÀiÁV
ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁrzÀÄÝ, D ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀgÀ¸ÀàgÀ vÀªÀÄä zÀÆgÀªÁtÂ
¸ÀASÉåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß «¤ªÀÄAiÀÄ ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ, £ÀAvÀgÀ ¤gÀAvÀgÀªÁV zÀÆgÀªÁt ªÀÄÆ®PÀ
ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¥ÀgÀ¸ÀàgÀ ¨sÉÃnAiÀiÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2
DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä vÀªÀÄä PÀÄlÄA§UÀ½AzÀ zÀÆgÀªÁV MnÖUÉ ªÁ¹¸À®Ä ¤zsÀðj¹,
¢£ÁAPÀ 14/12/2025 gÀAzÀÄ ¸ÁQë-30 ²æà ¨sÀgÀvï gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀgÁVgÀĪÀ
ªÉÄʸÀÆj£À ªÀÄ®¨Ágï UÉÆïïØ ±Á¥ï£À°è a£ÀßzÀ vÁ½AiÀÄ£ÀÄß Rjâ¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, £ÀAvÀgÀ
PÁ²UÉ vÉgÀ½, ¢£ÁAPÀ 17/12/2025 gÀAzÀÄ J-1 DgÉÆæ J-2 DgÉÆævÉUÉ vÁ½

- 13 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ §A¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F WÀl£ÉAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀ J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄÄ ¸ÁQë-1
gÀªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ ¸ÀA¸ÁgÀ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¤gÁPÀj¹, ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ UÀ¯ÁmÉ ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ,
CªÀgÀÄ ªÁ¸ÀªÁVzÀÝ ªÉÄʸÀÆj£À ªÀģɬÄAzÀ ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀºÁQgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
£ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 DgÉÆæ ªÉÄʸÀÆjUÉ vÉgÀ½, J-2 DgÉÆævÉ ºÁUÀÆ DPÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ
¸ÁQë-53 PÀÄ. E¶PÁ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ªÀÄÈvÉ PÀÄ. ªÉ¤ß¯Áè gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß vÀ£ÉÆßA¢UÉ
PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ vÀĪÀÄPÀÆjUÉ vÉgÀ½, ¸ÁQë-64 PÀÄ. ¨sÀÆ«ÄPÁ gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°è ¸ÁQë-53
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ©lÄÖ §A¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ
¥ÀÅ£ÀB ¸ÁQë-64 PÀÄ. ¨sÀÆ«ÄPÁ gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ vÉgÀ½, ªÀÄÈvÉ PÀÄ. ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß vÀªÉÆäA¢UÉ
PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ, ¸ÁQë-45 ²æà dAiÀÄAvï gÀªÀgÀ ªÀiÁ°ÃPÀvÀézÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ,
PÁqÀÄUÉÆÃr ¥Éǰøï oÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀ¢Ý£À aPÀ̧£ÀºÀ½îAiÀÄ ¸ÉÊPÁ£ï ªÉÄÊwæ «¯Áè £ÀA.11gÀ
ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¨sÉÆÃUÀåPÉÌ ¥ÀqÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ C°è ªÁ¸ÀªÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀzÀj ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÁ¸ÀªÁVzÀÝ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è,
ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀævÉåÃPÀ PÉÆoÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄ®V¸ÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ
E§âgÀÆ ¥ÀævÉåÃPÀ PÉÆoÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄ®UÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ zÉÊ»PÀ
¸ÀA¥ÀPÀðzÀ°èzÀÝ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè CªÀgÀ PÉÆoÀrUÉ §gÀÄwÛzÀÝjAzÀ DgÉÆæUÀ½UÉ
C¸ËPÀAiÀÄð GAmÁUÀÄwÛvÀÄÛ. F PÁgÀt¢AzÁV 2026£Éà ¸Á°£À ªÀiÁZïð wAUÀ¼À°è
J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÁQë-56 ²æêÀÄw CPÀëvÁ Dgï. gÀªÀgÀ
ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°è ©lÄÖ UÉÆêÁPÉÌ vÉgÀ½, £ÀAvÀgÀ ªÁ¥À¸ÀÄì §A¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä
MnÖ£À fêÀ£ÀPÉÌ CrØAiÀiÁUÀÄwÛzÁÝ¼É JA§ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼ÀÄ ¥Àj²µÀÖ
eÁwAiÀÄ ¨sÉÆë G¥ÀeÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀªÀ¼ÀÄ JA§ «ZÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß w½¢zÀÝgÀÆ, J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-
2. DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ DPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¥ÀgÀ¸ÀàgÀ C¥ÀgÁ¢üPÀ M¼À¸ÀAZÀÄ
gÀƦ¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, ¸ÀÆPÀÛ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄPÁÌV PÁAiÀÄÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. F C¥ÀgÁ¢üPÀ M¼À¸ÀAa£À
ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀjzÀ ¨sÁUÀªÁV, ¢£ÁAPÀ-24/03/2026 gÀAzÀÄ J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ
ºÀÄlÄÖºÀ§âzÀ CAUÀªÁV §mÉÖUÀ¼À£ÀÄß Rjâ¸À®Ä, J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ
PÁqÀÄUÉÆÃr ¥Éǰøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ ªÀiÁ®Ä¥ÀnÖ.¸ÀASÉå-83/2026gÀ DnðPÀ¯ï £ÀA.2gÀ°è
£ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ PÉJ-05-J£ï-J¯ï-5505 £ÉÆÃAzÀt ¸ÀASÉåAiÀÄ PÁj£À°è
EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀPÉÌ §A¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ 100 Cr gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ ªÉ¸ïÖ ¸ÉÊmï ±Á¥ï
§½ J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ±Á¦AUï ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä E½¹, J-1 DgÉÆæ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß
vÀ£ÉÆßA¢UÉ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ, EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éǰøï oÁuÁ
¸ÀgÀºÀ¢Ý£À 12£Éà J ªÀÄÄRå gÀ¸ÉÛ, ºÉZï.J.J¯ï. 2£Éà ºÀAvÀzÀ°ègÀĪÀ ¸ÁQë-63 ²æêÀÄw
ZÁA¢¤ gÀªÀgÀ ªÀiÁ°ÃPÀvÀézÀ ¨Á¹Ì£ï gÁ©£ïì L¸ï QæÃA CAUÀrUÉ gÁwæ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ

- 14 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


9.20 UÀAmÉUÉ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃVgÀÄvÁÛ£É. C°è ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè½UÉ w£Àß®Ä L¸ï QæÃA
PÉÆr¹, L¸ï QæÃA PÉÃPï£ÀÄß Rjâ¹PÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛ£É. F CAUÀrAiÀÄ°è PÉ®¸À
ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝ ¸ÁQë-44 ²æà C¤zsÀ£ï dªÀiÁwAiÀiÁ gÀªÀgÀÄ w½¹zÀAvÉ, J-1 DgÉÆæ
CAUÀrAiÀÄ ¨ÁåAPï SÁvÉUÉ UÀÆUÀ¯ï ¥Éà ªÀÄÆ®PÀ MlÄÖ gÀÆ.907/- ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß
¥ÁªÀw¹gÀÄvÁÛ£É.
£ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 DgÉÆæ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß PÁj£À°è PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ,
vÁ£ÀÄ ZÁ®PÀ£À ¹Ãn£À°è PÀĽwzÀÄÝ, ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼ÀÄ ZÁ®PÀ£À ¹Ãn£À »A¨sÁUÀzÀ
ªÀÄzsÀåzÀ ¹Ãn£À°è ¤AvÀÄPÉÆArzÀÝ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è, J-1 DgÉÆæ ¤ÃrzÀÝ L¸ï QæÃA
ZÉ£ÁßV®è ºÁUÀÆ vÁ£ÀÄ w£ÀÄߪÀÅ¢®è JAzÀÄ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè ºÉý L¸ï QæÃA C£ÀÄß PÁj£ÉƼÀUÉ
ZÉ°èzÀ PÁgÀtPÉÌ PÉÆÃ¥ÀUÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛ£É. F ªÉÃ¼É ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä fêÀ£ÀPÉÌ
CrØAiÀiÁUÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ «ZÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄ£À¹ì£À°èlÄÖPÉÆAqÀÄ, DPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ
GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ J-1 DgÉÆæ vÀ£Àß JqÀUÉÊ ªÉÆtPÉʬÄAzÀ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À ºÉÆmÉÖAiÀÄ ¨sÁUÀPÉÌ
§®ªÁV UÀÄ¢Ý, £ÀAvÀgÀ vÀ£Àß JqÀUÉʬÄAzÀ DPÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄÆUÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨Á¬ÄAiÀÄ£ÀÄß
§®ªÁV ªÀÄÄaÑ G¹gÀÄUÀnÖ¹ PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÁÛ£É. ªÀÄÈvÀ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè ªÀÄÈvÀ¥ÀnÖgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß
RavÀ¥Àr¹PÉÆAqÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ, DPÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß ZÁ®PÀ£À ¹Ãn£À »A¨sÁUÀzÀ
¹Ãn£À°è CAUÁvÀªÁV ªÀÄ®V¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ±Á¦AUï ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä
©nÖzÀÝ ¸ÀܼÀPÉÌ PÁj£À°è vÉgÀ½, J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÁj£À°è PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ, ªÀÄÈvÉ
ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß vÁ£ÀÄ PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹gÀÄvÁÛ£É. £ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2
DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä PÀÈvÀåªÀÅ AiÀiÁjUÀÆ w½AiÀÄzÀAvÉ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ
¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ¸ÁPÁëzsÁgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £Á±À¥Àr¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ, ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À
ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß CzÉà PÁj£À°è ¸ÁV¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, £ÀgÀ¸Á¥ÀÅgÀzÀ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-PÉÆïÁgÀ
ºÉzÁÝjAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ PÉ¥sÉ PÁ¦ü qÉÃUÉ vÉgÀ½gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. C°è J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ J-
2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ ºÀÄlÄÖºÀ§âªÀ£ÀÄß DZÀj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, PÉ¥sÉ PÁ¦ü qÉà gÀ°è PÉ®¸À
ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀĪÀ ¸ÁQë-58 ²æà ¸ÉÆêÀıÉÃRgï gÀªÀjUÉ gÀÆ.250/- ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß CªÀgÀ
¥sÉÇÃ£ï £ÀA§gï-7349264322UÉ ¥ÉÃnJA ªÀÄÆ®PÀ ¥ÁªÀw¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £ÀAvÀgÀ ªÀÄÈvÉ
ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß PÁj£À°èAiÉÄà ¸ÁV¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, ¸ÁQë-23 ²æà ªÉAPÀmï Q¯Áèj
gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀgÁVgÀĪÀ ºÉƸÀPÉÆÃmÉ mÉÆÃ¯ï ¥ÁèeÁªÀ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ 25/03/2026
gÀAzÀÄ ¨É¼ÀV£À eÁªÀ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 1.29 UÀAmÉUÉ zÁn, vÁªÀÅ ªÁ¸ÀªÁVzÀÝ «¯ÁèUÉ ªÁ¥À¸ÀÄì
§A¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. «¯ÁèUÉ §AzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 DgÉÆæ ªÀÄÈvÉ «¤ß¯Áè¼À ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß
PÁj¤AzÀ JwÛPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃV, F »AzÉ DPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄ®V¸ÀÄwÛzÀÝ PÉÆoÀrAiÀÄ°èAiÉÄÃ
ªÀÄ®V¹gÀÄvÁÛ£É. £ÀAvÀgÀ J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ vÁªÀÅ ªÀÄÈvÉ «¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß PÉƯÉ

- 15 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ «ZÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄgɪÀiÁZÀĪÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ¸ÁPÁëzsÁgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
£Á±À¥Àr¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ, ¨É½UÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 8.00 UÀAmÉUÉ ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À
ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß aQvÉìUÁV ¹UÉúÀ½îAiÀÄ «ÄgÁPÀ¯ï D¸ÀàvÉæUÉ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ
ºÉÆÃVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ°è ¥ÀjÃQë¹zÀ ¸ÁQë-26 qÁ. ªÀÄzsÀĸÀÆzÀ£ï gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀÄÈvÉ
ªÉ¤ß¯Áè ªÀÄÈvÀ¥ÀnÖgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß zÀÈqsÀ¥Àr¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä vÀªÀÄä PÀÄlÄA§UÀ½AzÀ zÀÆgÀªÁV
¥ÀævÉåÃPÀªÁV ªÁ¹¸ÀÄwÛzÀÝ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è, J-2 DgÉÆævÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¥Àj²µÀÖ
eÁwAiÀÄ ¨sÉÆë G¥ÀeÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀ ªÀÄÈvÉ PÀÄ. ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä SÁ¸ÀVvÀ£ÀPÉÌ ºÁUÀÆ
MnÖ£À fêÀ£ÀPÉÌ CrØAiÀiÁUÀÄwÛzÁÝ¼É JA§ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ, ¥ÀgÀ¸ÀàgÀ C¥ÀgÁ¢üPÀ M¼À¸ÀAZÀÄ
gÀƦ¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, ¸ÀÆPÀÛ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ªÀÄÈvÉ ªÉ¤ß¯Áè¼À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ
£ÀAvÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ¸ÁPÁëzsÁgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £Á±À¥Àr¸ÀĪÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤dªÁzÀ
WÀl£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄgɪÀiÁZÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ ªÀÄÈvÀzÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÁV¹, WÀl£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀd
¸ÁªÀÅ JA§AvÉ ©A©¸À®Ä ¥ÀæAiÀÄwß¹gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ vÀ¤SÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀAUÀ滸À¯ÁzÀ
¸ÁPÁëåzsÁgÀUÀ½AzÀ zÀÈqsÀ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
DzÀÝjAzÀ DgÉÆæUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ F ªÉÄîÌAqÀ PÀ®A UÀ¼À C£ÀéAiÀÄ
"

zÉÆõÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.


13. On perusal of materials placed before this Court,
viz. Post-mortem report, Inquest mahazar, voluntary statement
of the accused and also the mahazar conducted by the police,
the same would reveal prima facie material against accused
No.1. The commission of alleged offence is heinous in nature
and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The trial
Court has rightly observed that after accused No.2 deserting
her husband, the accused No.2 has been staying along with
accused No.1 with her daughter Kum. Vennila and on the
th
intervening night between 24/25 March 2026, accused No.1

- 16 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


was in the company of accused No.2 and her daughter
deceased Vennila. The incident in question occurred when the
deceased Vennila was alleged to have been along with her
mother accused No.2 and appellant-accused No.1. Therefore,
there is no eye-witness to the incident.

14. Now, the investigating officer has collected
sufficient material against accused No.1. Further the Special
Court has observed that the Investigating Officer has been
collecting substantial material against the accused and the case
on hand is a cold-blooded murder of a young girl aged about
six years, and rejected the application.

15. As regards delay of 70 days in filing the complaint
against the accused is concerned, as already stated above,
though the complainant has suspected the accused 1 and 2, the
investigating officer has not registered the case as Crime,
instead has registered as UDR 21 of 2026. In this regard, the
learned Additional SPP has submitted that because of the
negligence on the part of the investigating officer, case was not
registered for 70 days and the concerned Investigating Officer
has been suspended and Departmental Enquiry is also initiated
against him in this regard. Therefore, the delay of 70 days in

- 17 -

CRL.A No.1460 of 2026


registering the case by the concerned police is not a ground for
grant of bail.

16. On careful examination of the entire material on
record, at this stage, this Court has noticed that there are
prima facie material to constitute the alleged offence. I do not
find any legal or factual error in the impugned order passed by
the trial Court. Hence, the appellant has not made out any
ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction
and order on sentence. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the
negative.
Regarding Point No.2:

17. For the discussion and reasons aforestated, I
proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
Appeal dismissed.

Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE







KBM,lnn