Karnataka High Court
Nithin vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 July, 2025
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
CRL.P No. 9924 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8210 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9924 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8210 OF 2024
IN CRL.P No. 9924/2024
BETWEEN:
NITHIN,
S/O. VIRUPAKSHA,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT. LALADEVANAHALLI VILLAGE,
K.R.NAGARA TALUK,
MYSURU DISTRICT (PRESENTLY IN J.C.)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NATARAJU T., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by KAVYA R AND:
Location: High THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Court of BY KUVEMPUNAGAR POLICE STATION,
Karnataka
MYSURU.
NOW REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.WAHEEDA.M.M., HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR
BAIL IN S.C.NO.406/2022 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.56/2022 OF
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
CRL.P No. 9924 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8210 of 2024
HC-KAR
KUVEMPUNAGAR POLICE MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
363, 364A, 120B R/W 149 OF IPC WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE
THE VII ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE MYSURU.
IN CRL.P NO. 8210/2024
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SANNU,
S/O SHASHI,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
PRESENTLY R/AT HALASURU VILLAGE,
PANCHAVALLI POST,
PERIYAPATNA TALUK,
MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 105.
PERMANENT, VADASERI VILLAGE,
KOTHAMANGALAM POST,
ERNAKULAM, DISTRICT.
KERALA - 686 691.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA K G.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY
KUVEMPUNAGARA POLICE,
REP BY HCGP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.406/2022
(CR.NO.56/2022 OF KUVEMPUNAGARA POLICE) PENDING
ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
CRL.P No. 9924 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8210 of 2024
HC-KAR
363, 364-A, 120-B R/W SEC.149 OF IPC.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
Accused Nos.1 and 5 in S.C.No.406/2022 pending
before the Court of VII Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Mysuru, arising out of Crime No.56/2022 registered
by Kuvempunagar Police Station, Mysuru District, for
offences punishable under Sections 363, 364A, 120B read
with Section 149 of IPC are before this Court in this
successive bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.PC
seeking regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.56/2022 was registered by
Kuvempunagar Police Station, Mysuru District, initially for
offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC read with
Section 34 of IPC against two unknown persons, based on
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
the first information dated 23.06.2022 received from
Girish T.D father of minor victim boy - Anujeeth Girish.
4. During the course of investigation, accused No.1
was arrested on 26.06.2022 and accused No.5 was
arrested on 25.06.2022. After completing investigation,
charge sheet has been filed in the present case against six
accused persons and petitioners are arraigned as accused
Nos.1 and 5 in the charge sheet. Accused No.5 had earlier
approached this Court in Crl.P.No.603/2023 and
Crl.P.No.6335/2024 which were dismissed for non
prosecution and dismissed as withdrawn respectively. It is
under these circumstances, petitioners are before this
Court in these two petitions.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners do not have criminal antecedents and they are
in custody for the last more than three years. Trial in the
case is not yet completed. Accordingly, he prays to allow
this petition.
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
6. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the
petition. She submits that efforts are being made to
complete the trial expeditiously.
7. FIR in the present case was registered against
two unknown persons. During the course of investigation,
six persons were arrested and after completing
investigation, charge sheet has been filed against them. In
the charge sheet it is alleged that accused Nos.1 to 6 had
conspired to kidnap the minor son of the first informant.
On 23.06.2022, the minor son of the first informant was
kidnapped in the car by accused Nos.2 to 5. Thereafter,
accused N.1 made a phone call to the first informant wife
demanding ransom amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs. Accordingly,
ransom amount was paid to the accused persons who
shared the same between them and subsequently released
the minor boy whom they had kidnapped.
8. The victim boy and other material charge sheet
witnesses have been already examined in the present case
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
before the trial Court. Petitioners who have no criminal
antecedents are in custody for the last more than three
years.
9. This Court taking into consideration that the
petitioners are in custody for a considerable period of
time, on 07.02.2025 after referring to the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AKIL @ JAVEL V/S
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) reported in (2013) 7 SCC 125
had directed trial judge to proceed with the trial on
day-to-day basis without granting any adjournment unless
sufficient reasons are recorded by the learned trial Court.
Though more than four months has lapsed thereafter, the
order sheet of the trial Court would reflect that there is no
sufficient progress in the trial of the case and prosecution
has failed to keep the charge sheet witnesses present
before the Court.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
JAVED GULAM NABI SHAIKH VS. STATE OF
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER - 2024 SCC ONLINE
SC 1693 at paragraph No.19, has observed as follows:
"19. If the State or any prosecuting agency
including the Court concerned has no
wherewithal to provide or protect the
fundamental right of an accused to have a
speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the
Constitution then the State or any other
prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea
for bail on the ground that the crime committed
is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies
irrespective of the nature of the crime."
11. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that
without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits
of the case, the prayer made by the petitioners for grant
of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively.
Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
The petitions are allowed.
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
The petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in
S.C.No.406/2022 pending before the Court of VII
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru, arising out
of Crime No.56/2022 registered by Kuvempunagar Police
Station, Mysuru District, for offences punishable under
Sections 363, 364A, 120B read with Section 149 of IPC,
subject to the following conditions:
a) The petitioners shall execute
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) 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;
NC: 2025:KHC:23333
HC-KAR
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.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
KVR
