Karnataka HC Grants Bail to Two Accused in Pathway-Dispute Murder Case, Citing Parity With Co-Accused

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioners were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the allegations, the completed investigation, and the circumstances of the case

The court held

The High Court allowed the petition and directed the release of Accused Nos. 3 and 5 on regular bail in S.C. No. 15/2026

It also directed

Each petitioner was required to execute a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum, and was prohibited from threatening or tampering with prosecution witnesses or becoming involved in similar or other offences.

The Court stated that breach of the conditions could lead the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail

01Facts

The petitioners, Accused Nos. 3 and 5, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from a dispute between related families over use of a pathway

pp. 2–3

The prosecution alleged that, during a confrontation, the petitioners and others assaulted the deceased and an injured eyewitness; the deceased died from a head injury

pp. 3–4 · p. 6

The petitioners were in judicial custody, and the investigation had concluded with the filing of a charge sheet

pp. 4–5 · p. 5

Bail had already been granted to Accused Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7

p. 6

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioners were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the allegations, the completed investigation, and the circumstances of the case

p. 2 · pp. 5–7

ii.2. Whether the petitioners were entitled to bail on the ground of parity with the co-accused who had been granted bail

pp. 6–7

03Law Applied

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) empowers the High Court to grant regular bail.

p. 7

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the severity of the potential punishment, the risk of absconding, the accused persons’ character and antecedents, the possibility of witness tampering, and parity with co-accused

p. 7

The offences charged included Section 103(1) and other provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

p. 2

The order cites no precedent

Provisions in the judgment · 13 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 11 provisions

Section 118 Section 189 Section 191 Section 126 Section 115 Section 109 Section 103 Section 352 Section 351 Section 324 Section 190

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the charge sheet had been filed and that the allegations attributed specific acts to the accused.

p. 5

It also considered that the petitioners were alleged to have assaulted the deceased with a club, while the postmortem report attributed death to a head injury causing subdural and subarachnoid haemorrhage

pp. 5–6

However, the Court found the allegations against the petitioners similar to those against co-accused who had already been granted bail, including Accused No. 1, who was alleged to have struck the deceased on the head with a club

p. 6

Considering the prosecution material and the relevant bail factors, including parity, the Court held that the petitioners could be released subject to conditions

p. 7