Two Alleged Conspirators In Murder Case Get Bail On Parity With Principal Accused: Karnataka HC

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioners were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, having regard to the allegations and the material on record

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and ordered the release of accused Nos. 6 and 8 on regular bail in Crime No. 123/2025 and the connected sessions case.

It also directed

Each petitioner was required to execute a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum and comply with conditions including attending court, not tampering with or threatening prosecution witnesses, cooperating with the Investigating Officer, and not committing further offences.

Breach of the conditions may result in an application for cancellation of bail

01Facts

The petitioners, accused Nos. 6 and 8, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a sessions case arising from Crime No. 123/2025 of Raibag Police Station.

pp. 2–4

The prosecution alleged that they conspired with accused Nos. 1 to 4 to commit murder.

pp. 2–4

The charge-sheet had been filed, and the case was pending before the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikkodi.

pp. 2–4

The petitioners relied on the fact that accused Nos. 1 to 3 had been granted regular bail and accused No. 4 anticipatory bail; the State opposed bail, citing the risk of witness tampering and interference with the trial

pp. 2–4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioners were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, having regard to the allegations and the material on record

p. 2 · pp. 4–6

ii.2. Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners on the ground of parity with the principal accused who had already been granted bail

pp. 4–6

03Law Applied

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, empowers the High Court to grant bail.

pp. 5–6

In deciding bail, the Court considers the nature and circumstances of the alleged offence, the accused’s position in relation to the victim and witnesses, the likelihood of absconding, reoffending or tampering with witnesses, and the accused’s character and antecedents.

pp. 5–6

A bail application does not require a mini-trial or a detailed assessment of the prosecution evidence.

pp. 5–6

Parity may support bail where similarly placed or principal accused have already been granted bail

pp. 5–6

No precedent was cited.

pp. 5–6

Provisions in the judgment · 10 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 9 provisions

Section 189 Section 191 Section 352 Section 353 Section 103 Section 140 Section 238 Section 61 Section 190

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the principal accused had already been enlarged on bail and considered the role attributed to the petitioners in light of that circumstance.

pp. 4–6

Although the prosecution asserted that the petitioners were involved in the alleged conspiracy and might interfere with the trial, the Court concluded, at the bail stage, that there were no reasonable and sufficient grounds to believe the petitioners were guilty.

pp. 4–6

It therefore treated parity as a basis for granting bail, without conducting a mini-trial on the prosecution case

pp. 4–6