Karnataka High Court
Sri Mudakanna Vattal Bhajantri @ ... vs State Of Karnataka By on 17 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10028 OF 2025
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MUDAKANNA VATTAL BHAJANTRI
@ MUDAKAPPA @ UPENDRA @ DASTAGIRI
S/O. VATTAL BHAJANTRI,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT C/O. SRINIVAS SVT WATER SUPPLY,
2ND CROSS, PANCHAVATHI LAYOUT,
SARAYIPALYA,
SHIVARAMA KARANTH NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 077.
PERMANENTLY R/AT
TELAGI VILLAGE,
BASAVANABAGEWADI TALUK,
VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT - 586 203.
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA ...PETITIONER
MURTHY RAJASHRI (BY SRI. TEJAS N.,ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE,
BENGALURU - 560 016.
(REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HCK, BANGALORE - 01)
...RESPONDENT
(BY Smt.WAHEEDA M M, HCGP)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION439 (FILED
U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN
CRIME NO.52/2025 OF RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 103(1), 64, 66 OF BNS 2023 WHICH IS PENDING
ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XI ACJM COURT IN
C.C.NO.55583/2025.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by sole accused under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in Crime No.52/2025 of Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 64 and 66 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner would contend that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident, and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial -3- NC: 2026:KHC:9472 CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025 HC-KAR evidence. The post-mortem examination was conducted on 23.01.2025, during which, the clothes of the deceased were seized. The said seizure of clothes of the deceased along with other articles were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) on 05.02.2025. The articles were sent to the FSL only after the arrest of the petitioner on 02.02.2025. Therefore, the alleged DNA test report with regard to the veil, having the petitioner's seminal stains, is doubtful, as the articles were sent after his arrest. The DNA report states that seminal stains of one male individual were detected on Article No.1, namely, the pyjama of the deceased. The said seminal stain is not that of the petitioner, and it creates doubt in the case of prosecution. The petitioner has not last seen near the incident by anybody. As the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances at trial. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:9472 CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State would contend that CW3 in his statement has identified the petitioner as the driver of the tanker. The statement of one Sunil indicates that he found Samsung mobile of the deceased near the spot, and he had given it to one Siddhappa, who sold it for Rs.1,000/-. The statement of the said Siddhappa has also been recorded. CW12 - Sachin has stated that he spoke with the accused at about 03.10 p.m, at that time, the accused was shivering and his hands and legs were shaking. The post-mortem report indicates that the death of the deceased is due to smothering. The charge sheet materials show a prima facie case against the petitioner. The DNA report indicates that the petitioner's seminal stains were found on the veil of the deceased. With this, she prayed to reject the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:9472 CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. As per the charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is that on 23.01.2025, at about 11.45 a.m., the petitioner/accused filled his water tanker. Thereafter, at about 12.30 p.m., while driving the tanker, he waited for the deceased. At about 1.15 p.m., the deceased came walking. At that time the accused allegedly held her by the head and neck, took her to a ditch, and she became unconscious. At that time, he allegedly removed her pyjama and committed rape on her. Thereafter, he is stated to have taken her to an area with trees, made her lie down, pressed her neck with his hands as well as with a veil, and killed her, and thereafter, he threw cement brick stones on her face, resulting in her death. At the time of the incident, the deceased was pregnant.
7. The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The articles of the deceased seized at the time of the post mortem examination. The clothes of the petitioner and his blood sample were sent to the FSL for examination. The FSL report indicates that -6- NC: 2026:KHC:9472 CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025 HC-KAR Article No.1, namely the veil of the deceased, was found to contain seminal stains, and it is of the petitioner. The other articles, namely Serial No.2 (pyjama) and Serial No.6 (vaginal swab), were also found to contain seminal stains, which of another male individual. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this aspect creates serious doubt in the case of the prosecution with regard to the alleged rape by the petitioner, inasmuch as the seminal stains of another male individual were found in the vaginal swab of the deceased. The petitioner has been judicial custody since 02.02.2025. As the charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further interrogation. As the case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances at trial. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.
8. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions.
In the result, the following:
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:9472 CRL.P No. 10028 of 2025 HC-KAR ORDER
i) The petition is allowed.
ii) The petitioner is granted bail in Crime No.52/2025 of Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 64 and 66 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 subject to following conditions:
a) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
b) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.
c) The petitioner shall attend the Trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37