Karnataka HC Denies Bail To Man Accused In Alleged Plot To Kill Woman’s Lover; He Can Renew Plea After Complainant, Key Witnesses Testify

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, despite the gravity of the alleged offences and the material relied upon by the prosecution.

The court held

The Court dismissed the bail petition and held that no sufficient ground for release had been made out at that stage.

It also directed

It nevertheless granted the petitioner liberty to apply to the trial court for bail after the complainant and material witnesses had been examined.

01Facts

The petitioner, accused No. 4, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from Crime No. 9/2026 and pending as S.C. No. 151/2026.

pp. 2–5

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and three co-accused conspired to kill the deceased, who was said to have had an illicit relationship with accused No. 1; the alleged offence occurred on 14 January 2026.

pp. 2–5

The petitioner maintained that the case rested on circumstantial evidence and that he had been falsely implicated.

pp. 2–5

The State opposed bail, relying on the charge-sheet materials and witness statements, and raising the risk of interference with witnesses.

pp. 2–5

The investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed.

pp. 2–5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, despite the gravity of the alleged offences and the material relied upon by the prosecution.

pp. 2–6

ii.2. Whether the petitioner could be permitted to renew his bail application after examination of the complainant and material witnesses.

p. 7

03Law Applied

The Court considered Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the provision under which the petitioner sought regular bail, and the alleged offences under Sections 61(2)(a), 103(1) and 238(a), read with Section 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

pp. 2–3

It treated the gravity of the alleged offence under Section 103(1), punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and the risk of witness interference as relevant considerations in deciding bail.

pp. 5–6

No judicial precedent was cited.

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 61 Section 103 Section 238 Section 3

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the prosecution relied on witness statements placing the deceased with accused Nos. 3 and 4 for the last time, as well as other charge-sheet materials said to implicate the petitioner.

p. 4

Given the alleged conspiracy and the severity of the offence, the Court considered the completion of the investigation and filing of the charge sheet insufficient, by themselves, to justify release.

pp. 5–6

It also found a risk of tampering with witnesses and considered it appropriate for the petitioner to remain in custody until the complainant and material witnesses had been examined.

pp. 5–6