NASIRUDDIN vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201263 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
NASIRUDDIN S/O MAHEBOOB,
AGE : 34 YEARS, OCC : LABOUR,
R/O: MARTUR VILLAGE,
TQ : SHAHABAD,
DIST : KALABURAGI – 585 228.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI MAHANTESH H. DESAI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH SHAHABAD TOWN P.S.,
TQ: SHAHABAD,
DIST : KALABURAGI.
REP. BY ADDL. SPP.,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH – 585 102.
2. REKHA W/O GOVIND RATHOD,
AGE : 34 YEARS, OCC : LABOUR,
R/O: MARTUR VILLAGE, TQ : SHAHABAD,
DIST : KALABURAGI – 585 228.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SIDDALING P.PATIL, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
SRI NILUFARHANAZ, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS (439
OF CR.P.C) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION AND
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.CASE POCSO
NO.146/2026 PENDING BEFORE THE COURT ADDL. DIST. AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC-I) POCSO, KALABURAGI, FOR THE
OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 74, 75(II), 78 OF BNS AND
SECTIONS 8 AND 12 OF POCSO ACT, SHAHABAB P.S., ARISING
OUT OF CR.NO.77/2026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Addl. SPP for the respondent No.1/ State and
the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 on the
petition. Perused the relevant materials on record.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’), praying to
grant bail in his favour in the case in Crime No.77/2026
of the respondent Police for the offences punishable
under Sections 74, 75(ii) and 78 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections 8 and 12 of
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
(for short ‘POCSO Act’) , pending in Spl.C. (POCSO)
No.146/2026 before the learned Addl. District and
Sessions Judge (FTSC-I) POCSO, Kalaburagi.
3. The learned Addl. SPP for the respondent
No.1 and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2
have orally objected to the petition submitting that
similar bail application filed by the petitioner was
dismissed by this Court. This is successive bail petition
without there being any changed circumstances.
Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. Hence,
both the Addl. SPP and the learned counsel for the
respondents have sought for dismissal of the petition.
4. The case alleged against the petitioner is that
on 04.06.2026 at about 1.00 p.m., when the victim had
gone to attend nature call, the petitioner near Itagi Road
Pool Bridge by coming behind her, touched her hands
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
and told her that he would pay Rs.500/- and forced her
to sleep with him and started dragging her holding her
hands and she escaped from his hand. Therefore, the
petitioner committed the alleged offence.
5. The contention of the petitioner is that he is
innocent of the offences alleged against him and he has
not committed any offence as alleged. However, the
investigation is already over and the charge sheet is filed
against the petitioner. The case is registered before the
learned Special Judge and as submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the evidence of all witnesses
are recorded. The certified copy of the order sheet of the
case pending before the learned Special Judge would
show that now the case stands posted to 12.10.2026 for
recording evidence of the accused under Section 313 of
Cr.P.C. This would clearly show that the prosecution
evidence is already recorded and as submitted by the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
learned Addl. SPP, the matter will be disposed of on
merits in the near future.
6. As submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, this Court has disposed of the earlier petition
filed by the petitioner in Crl.P. No.200935/2026 as per
the order dated 17.08.2026 and while dismissing the
said petition, this Court has observed that the petitioner
is at liberty to file bail application after examination of
the victim and other material witnesses by the trial
Court. Hence, the submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner is that now trial Court has examined all
the witnesses in case and hence, at this stage there is
absolutely no reason to deny bail to the petitioner.
7. However, the material on record would show
that the victim supported the case of prosecution in her
evidence. Moreover, now the case is posted for
recording statement of the accused. Therefore, in the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
near future the matter itself will be disposed of. Hence,
the question of granting bail in favour of the petitioner
at this stage does not arise.
8. One of the grounds urged by the petitioner for
grant of bail is that his mother is aged about 68 years
and she is suffering from ill-health and the presence of
petitioner is very much necessary to look after the
health of his mother. In support of this contention, the
petitioner has produced copy of the laboratory report in
respect of his mother issued by the City Diagnostics.
The said report would show that the mother of
petitioner is suffering from illness as under:
“- Ligamentum flavum thickening at D10-D11
level causing indentation of thecal sac from
the posterior aspect. There is no significant
compression of the spinal cord.
- No evidence of spinal canal compromise.
- Spinal cord is normal in morphology and
signal intensity.
- CVJ and visualized posterior fossa appear
normal.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
IMPRESSION:
68 year lady man with backache, MRI lumbar
spine with whole spine screening shows,
* Bone marrow odematous changes in L4, L5 and
S1 vertebral bodies, associated pre-vertebral and
paravertebral collections and anterior epidural
collection causing moderate spinal canal
narrowing and clumping of cauda equina nerve
roots.
--------Imaging features are suggestive of infective
spondylodiscitis (likely Tubercular etiology). ”
The copy of the Admission Summary documents
produced by the petitioner would show that the mother
of petitioner was treated as out patient.
9. There is absolutely no document to show that
the mother of petitioner is suffering from any serious
ailments and she was treated as inpatient in the
hospital for any of the alleged ailments. It is pertinent
to note that the mother of victim already took medical
treatment when the petitioner was in judicial custody.
Therefore, the contention of petitioner that his presence
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
is very much necessary to look after the health of his
mother does not merit consideration at this stage.
10. Moreover, as mentioned hereinabove, the case
pending before the trial Court will be disposed of on its
merits in the near future. As submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, it is true that the offence
alleged against the petitioner is punishable with
imprisonment to the extent of 5 years. However, the
material on record would show that the petitioner had
been in judicial custody from 04.06.2026. Hence, the
petitioner is in judicial custody only for the period of 3½
months as on this day. Hence, considering punishment
for the alleged offence and the period of imprisonment,
which is already undergone by the petitioner, it cannot
be a ground to release the petitioner on bail at this
stage, that too when the case pending before the trial
Court is at the fag end.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11172
CRL.P No. 201263 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030099572026
11. Any of the ground urged by the petitioner
cannot be considered at this stage to grant bail.
Moreover, as submitted by the learned counsel for the
respondent No.2, unless the changed circumstances are
made, the question of considering successive bail
petition by this Court does not arise. Consequently, the
petition is liable to be dismissed.
12. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is hereby dismissed.
ii) Any of the observations made by this
Court in the order shall not influence the
trial Court in proceeding with the case on
its merits.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
SBS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8