NARASAREDDY vs THE STATE THROUGH
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 8 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201234 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
NARASAREDDY
S/O HAMPPANNA SAJJAN,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
R/O GONAL VILLAGE,
TQ: WADAGERA
DIST: YADGIRI-585 355.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH,
WADAGERA POLICE STATION,
DIST: YADGIRI-585 355.
R/BY ITS ADDL SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P. FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C (OLD) U/S 483 OF
BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON REGULAR
BAIL IN CRIME NO.57/2026 OF WADIGERE POLICE STATION
DISTRICT YADGIRI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC
61(2), 103(1), 240, 332(A), READ WITH 190 OF THE BHARATIYA
Digitally signed
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
NYAYA SANHITA 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SHAHAPUR DIST YADGIRI, ON SUCH
TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THIS HONOURABLE COURT
DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
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/
accused No.1 and the learned HCGP for the
respondent/ State on the petition. Perused the relevant
materials on record.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused No.1 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’), for
an order to release him on bail in the case in Crime
No.57/2026 of respondent Police for the offences
punishable under Sections 61(2), 103(1), 240, 332(A)
read with 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
‘BNS’) pending before the learned Principal Civil Judge
and JMFC, Shahapur.
3. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the present case is committed to the
learned Sessions Judge and registered as SC
No.29/2026 and the charge is framed against this
petitioner.
4. The learned HCGP has orally objected to the
petition submitting that the investigation is completed
and the charge sheet is already filed against the
petitioners for the alleged offences. There is prima facie
case against the petitioner. The offence alleged against
the petitioner is punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS
and it is heinous offence. The deceased is the father of
the petitioner herein. Moreover, the petitioner is the
main accused in the case and the trial is not yet
commenced. Mere fact that the charge sheet is filed in
the case cannot be a ground to release the petitioner on
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
bail, considering the gravity and seriousness of the
offences alleged against the petitioner. Therefore, the
learned HCGP has sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. The prosecution was set into motion against
the petitioner initially on the complaint of petitioner
himself, who had lodged complaint against unknown
persons alleging that he found his father dead on his
bed with injuries on his body by suspecting some
unknown persons committed murder of his father
between 07.00 p.m. of 11.03.2026 and 09.00 a.m. of
12.03.2026.
6. It is also contended that after the partition of
property between the petitioner and his brothers, his
father was staying alone in the house and his brothers
were sending food to his father and his father used to go
to village in the morning to get essential materials as
daily routine. When the matter stood thus, on
12.03.2026, when his father did not come to village in
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
morning hours, the complainant went to the
residence of his father and found him dead with injuries
and informed his brothers and thereafter lodged
complaint.
7. During the course of investigation, the
respondent police after collecting information that the
accused No.2 to 5 who had previously quarreled with
deceased being labourers came to village on 11.03.2026
between 09.30 p.m. to 10.00 p.m. on their Motor cycle
and met the petitioner on that day and thereafter not
found in the village. On next day, on enquiry, there
arose suspicion against the petitioner in minds of the
police, who met the accused No.2 to 5 on the same day
and apprehended the petitioner and recorded his
voluntary statement. During interrogation, it was
revealed that the petitioner had ill-will against his father
with regard to transfer of share of property in his name,
who had sold 6 acres of land and also threatened of
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
selling entire land standing in the name of the deceased.
Further, there was quarrel between the deceased and
the family of accused No.2 to 5 about to 5 to 6 months
prior to the incident when they had come to labour work
by putting their hut in the land due to which, the
accused No.2 had quarreled with petitioner’s father. The
petitioner presuming that if his father sold entire land,
nothing will remain to him and thereby made up his
mind to kill his father and called the accused No.2 to
carry out the same and after hatching plan together, the
petitioner took the accused No.2 to 5 to Saidapura on
11.03.2026 who caused death of the deceased by
causing injuries. Thus, the petitioner suppressing the
fact that he got murdered his father through
co-accused. All the informations were collected by the
police based on the confessional statement of petitioner,
he being the complainant in the case and thereafter the
case is registered against the petitioner and other
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
accused persons. Hence, the petitioner has committed
the alleged offence.
8. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the
offences alleged against him and he has not committed
any such offences as alleged. Per contra, the learned
HCGP has submitted that the respondent police filed
charge sheet after completion of the investigation before
the concerned Court and the case is registered against
the petitioner and other accused persons. There is
prima facie case against the petitioner for the alleged
offences. As the petitioner is the prime accused who is
allegedly got caused death of his own father through
other accused persons. Hence, the contention of learned
counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent of the
offences alleged and he has not committed any of such
offences does not merit consideration at this stage.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
9. However, as pointed out by the learned
counsel for the petitioner and also as forthcoming from
the papers on record, initially the prosecution was set
into motion on the complaint of the petitioner himself
against unknown persons. During the investigation, on
the basis of voluntary statement of the petitioner, the
case was registered against the petitioner and other
accused persons.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
drawn the attention of this Court to the decision of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Criminal) No.7532 of 2025
( P. Krishna Mohan Reddy Vs the State of Andhra
Pradesh, DD 16.05.2025), wherein it is held that the
statements of accused recorded under Section 161 of
Cr.P.C cannot be used against co-accused at the stage
of anticipatory or regular bail. Thus, if the accused
makes confession to the police, such a statement is
rendered inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
Evidence Act and it cannot be used to implicate a
co-accused. However, it is pertinent to mention here
that the present petition is filed during pretrial stage
and any of the contentions of the petitioner cannot be
considered to come to the conclusion that the petitioner
is innocent of the offences alleged against him.
11. Another submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner is that the motive for the alleged offence is
dispute regarding the share in the property between the
deceased and the petitioner, who is son of the deceased.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has produced
copy of the plaint, wherein the petitioner along with
other sons of the deceased filed suit for partition and
the said suit is pending for consideration. Therefore, at
this stage, the motive for the alleged offence that there
was dispute regarding the issue of the property cannot
be a ground to come to the conclusion that there is no
case against the petitioner.
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
12. However, even if it is accepted for the sake of
argument that there is prima facie case against the
petitioner, it is clear that the investigation is already
over and the charge sheet is filed against the petitioner
and other accused persons. As per the case registered
against the petitioner, there was overtact of the accused
No.2 to 5 in the alleged incident and they are already
granted regular bail by this Court as per the order dated
08.06.2026 in Crl.P.No.200694 of 2026.
13. The allegation made against the petitioner is
that he instigated and planned to cause death of the
deceased with the help of the accused No.2 to 5. Such
contention is the matter to be considered on the merits
of the case. As submitted by learned HCGP, the charge
sheet is already filed by the respondent Police against
the petitioner and other accused persons. This would
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
show that the petitioner is not required by the
investigating Officer for any custodial interrogation.
14. Mere fact that the case alleged against the
petitioner is punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS
and the same is punishable with death or imprisonment
for life, cannot be a ground to deny bail to the
petitioner. There is no special ground made out by the
respondent Police to deny bail to the petitioner.
15. There is no material forthcoming from the
respondent Police to show any antecedents of the
petitioner that he committed similar offences or any
offences earlier. Further, the petition averments and
the prosecution papers on record would show that the
petitioner is permanent resident of Gonal village,
Wadagere Taluk, Yadgiri within the jurisdiction of the
Court of learned Sessions Judge.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
16. Moreover, the prosecution papers on record
would show that the petitioner was remanded to judicial
custody on 17.03.2026 and since then for a period of
more than seven months, the petitioner has been in
judicial custody as on this day. There is no ground
made out by learned HCGP for continuation of detention
of the petitioner in judicial custody, as the investigation
is already completed and the charge sheet is filed.
However, as discussed above, the remand of judicial
custody would show that the custodial interrogation of
the petitioners is not required by the respondent police
at this stage.
17. It is well settled that bail is rule and jail is an
exception. The accused should not be allowed to remain
in judicial custody at pre-trial stage as punishment for
the alleged offence. The question whether the petitioner
has committed the offence or not is to be considered on
merits of the case. Hence, only for the purpose of
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court
during trial of the case, he cannot be allowed to be
detained in judicial custody.
18. Any of the apprehensions of the learned
HCGP can be suitably met with by imposing proper and
necessary conditions on the petitioner while granting
regular bail in his favour making him to assist the trial
Court during trial of the case. There is absolutely no
any special ground made out by the respondent Police
to deny bail to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has
made out sufficient grounds for granting bail in his
favour and consequently, the petition deserves to be
allowed.
19. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The Criminal Petition is allowed.
ii. Consequently, the petitioner/ accused No.1
shall be enlarged on bail in the case in Crime
No.57/2026 of the respondent Police for the
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
offences punishable under Sections 61(2),
103(1), 240, 332(A) read with 190 of BNS, on
his executing personal bond for
Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the like
sum to the satisfaction of the learned
Magistrate or the trial Court/ Sessions Court,
as the case may be, subject to the following
conditions that:
a) The petitioner/ accused No.1 shall
appear before the learned Magistrate
and also before the trial Court/
Sessions Court as and when directed
and he shall assist the trial Court/
Sessions Court in trial of the case.
b) He shall appear before the respondent
Police as and when required and he
shall assist the Investigating Officer in
further investigation of the case, if any.
c) He shall not tamper with prosecution
witnesses and shall not hamper further
investigation and trial of the case in any
manner, and
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11447
CRL.P No. 201234 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098522026
d) He shall not commit similar offences or
any offence during the pendency of
case.
If the petitioner violates any of the conditions of
bail, the bail granted in his favour shall stand
cancelled.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
MBB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11