High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 KAR CK 2109

Munireddy.S.H & Anr. vs State By Shidlaghatta Rural Police

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru Bench · Decided on 5 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
S Vishwajith Shetty, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9330 OF 2026

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 798 words
1.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 in SC No.42/2024 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, sitting at Chintamani, arising out of Crime No.152/2024 registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 201, 212, 341 read with Section 34 of IPC, are before this Court in this successive bail petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3.

FIR in Crime No.152/2024 was registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, against petitioners herein based on the first information dated 25.06.2024 received from Venkatesha, brother of deceased Smt. Padmamma. During the course of investigation of the said case, petitioners herein were arrested on 25.06.2024 and 26.06.2024 respectively and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet is filed against three persons and petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2 in the charge sheet. Their bail application filed before the Trial Court was earlier rejected and thereafter, accused No.2 had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.13636/2024, which was dismissed as not pressed on 26.03.2025 with liberty to renew the bail application after examination of alleged eyewitnesses CW2 to CW6 is completed before the Trial Court. Subsequently, petitioners had filed a fresh bail application before the Trial Court in SC No.42/2024, which was rejected on 20.02.2026. Therefore, they are before this Court.

4.

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that petitioner No.1 is the father of petitioner No.2. Petitioner No.1 was married to deceased Smt. Padmamma and from the said wedlock, they had two children. It appears that the children born to petitioner No.1 and Smt. Padmamma had died and thereafter, there was a dispute between the couple and subsequently, Smt. Padmamma had abandoned the petitioner No.1 and was residing separately. Petitioner No.1 had thereafter married Smt. Manjula and petitioner No.2 is the son born to petitioner No.1 and his second wife Smt. Manjula.

5.

Smt. Padmamma appears to have filed multiple civil and criminal cases against petitioners herein and their family members and therefore, petitioners developed vengeance against Smt. Padmamma. On 25.06.2024, they had gone to the house of Smt. Padmamma, armed with weapons and after quarreling with her, they assaulted her with weapons they carried and had committed her murder. CW2 to CW6 are the alleged eye witnesses to the said incident in which accused Nos.1 and 2 allegedly had assaulted and committed murder of Smt. Padmamma.

6.

Accused No.2 had earlier approached this Court in Crl.P.No.13636/2024, which was dismissed as not pressed on 26.03.2025 with liberty to renew his bail application after examination of CW2 to CW6, who are alleged eye witnesses to the incident, is completed before the Trial Court.

7.

During the course of trial, prosecution has now examined totally 7 witnesses as PW1 to PW7, out of 49 charge sheet witnesses cited in the present case. Amongst the alleged eyewitnesses CW2 to CW6, prosecution has examined CW2, CW3 and CW6. It is not in dispute that prosecution has given up CW4 and CW5. Therefore, as on this date, all the material charge sheet witnesses have been examined. Petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents and they are in custody for the last more than three years. Out of 49 charge sheet witnesses, only 7 witnesses have been examined as on this date and therefore, the chances of the trial being completed and the case being disposed off on merits in the near future is very remote. Since the material charge sheet witnesses are already examined, there cannot be any apprehension that petitioners may tamper with the said witnesses. Under the circumstances, the following order:-

8.

The petition is allowed. The petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in SC No.42/2024 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, sitting at Chintamani, arising out of Crime No.152/2024 registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 201, 212, 341 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

a)

Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

b)

The petitioners shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts their appearance for valid reasons;

c)

The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

d)

The petitioners shall not involve in similar offences in future;

e)

The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against them is disposed off.