01Facts
The petitioners, Accused Nos. 1–3 in S.C. No. 812/2026, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after their applications were rejected by the Sessions Court.
pp. 3–6The case arose from an incident in which, according to the prosecution, Accused No. 2 assaulted two persons with a hockey stick and Accused Nos. 1–4 assaulted the injured informant, CW1, with a knife.
pp. 3–6CW1 sustained seven injuries, including two certified as grievous.
pp. 3–6The petitioners had been arrested between 25 and 28 March 2026; the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed.
pp. 3–6Accused No. 4 had already been granted bail.
pp. 3–6The petitioners were aged between 20 and 23 and had criminal antecedents.
pp. 3–602Issues
i.Whether the petitioners should be enlarged on regular bail in the circumstances of the case, notwithstanding the allegations and their criminal antecedents
pp. 4–6ii.Whether bail should be subject to conditions to secure the petitioners’ attendance and protect the prosecution process
pp. 6–703Law Applied
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, empowers the High Court to grant regular bail.
p. 3The Court’s decision reflects an assessment of the case circumstances, including the nature of the allegations and injuries, the status of the investigation, parity with a co-accused already granted bail, and the petitioners’ antecedents; it did not cite any precedent or set out a separate doctrinal test.
pp. 5–6Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 112Section 111Section 109Section 352Section 351Section 190
04Reasoning
The Court considered the alleged armed assault and the petitioners’ criminal antecedents, but also noted that the injured victim had been discharged and was stable, that only two of the seven injuries were classified as grievous, and that the investigation was complete and the charge sheet filed.
pp. 5–7It further took account of Accused No. 4’s grant of bail and the petitioners’ young ages.
pp. 5–7On balance, the Court concluded that bail was warranted, subject to conditions addressing attendance, witness interference, further offending, travel, and periodic reporting to the police.
pp. 5–705Holding
The petitions were allowed, and the petitioners were ordered to be released on bail in S.C. No. 812/2026.
pp. 6–7Conditions included a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 each with two sureties for the like sum; regular attendance at trial; no threat to or tampering with prosecution witnesses; no involvement in similar offences; no leaving the trial court’s jurisdiction without permission; and monthly attendance at the Byatarayanapura Police Station for one year.
pp. 6–7Original Court PDF
SRI KIRAN @ KONGAvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
