Narasimha Reddy @ Reddy vs State Of Karnataka

Accused No.1 in SC No.276/2025 pending before the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.123/2025 registered by Kaggalipura Police Station, Ramanagara, for the offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 140(2), 142 and 311 of BNS, 2023, is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

FIR in Crime No.123/2025 was registered by Kaggalipura Police Station, Ramanagara, against petitioner and others based on the first information dated 08.04.2025, received from Kavitha, who is the wife of alleged victim Rajashekar. During the course of investigation of the said case, petitioner was arrested on 08.04.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet is filed against four persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the Trial Court in SC No.276/2025 was rejected on 15.04.2026. Therefore, he is before this Court.

It is the case of the prosecution that on 07.04.2025 at about 10.30 p.m., while CW2 was speaking on phone in front of his house, accused Nos.1 to 4, who came in a Maruti Suzuki Swift car bearing Reg.No.KA03AF8142 had abducted CW2 in the said car by threatening him with a knife and had subsequently demanded a ransom of Rs.1 crore from him. It is also alleged that accused persons threatened to kill CW2 -Rajashekhar in the event, he does not pay the money demanded by them. Charge sheet material would go to show that accused persons had withdrawn a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-using the ATM card of the victim and had spent a sum of Rs.61,000/- out of the same. CW1 had come out of the house after hearing sound when accused Nos.1 to 4 were attempting to abduct her husband and even she was threatened with knife by the accused persons. On enquiry, she came to know that it was the petitioner and his accomplices, who had kidnapped her husband and it is under these circumstances, FIR is registered against the petitioner and others. After CW2 was released by the accused persons, his statement has been recorded in the present case and he also has spoken about the role committed by the petitioner in the present case.

Petitioner is a person with criminal history of having as many as 41 criminal cases registered against him, including cases registered for the offences punishable under Section 302, 307 of IPC and other heinous offences. The aforesaid 41 cases are registered against the petitioner in various Police Stations at Bengaluru for the period from 2012 to 2024. Therefore, the chances of the petitioner indulging in committing similar offences, in the event he is enlarged on bail in the present case, cannot be ruled out. Under the circumstances, his prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be rejected. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.