Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

S C Basavaraju @ S C Basavarajaiah vs State Of Karnataka
2026 Latest Caselaw 1322 Kant

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1322 Kant
Judgement Date : 16 February, 2026

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

S C Basavaraju @ S C Basavarajaiah vs State Of Karnataka on 16 February, 2026

Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
                                           -1-
                                                       NC: 2026:KHC:9461
                                                   CRL.P No. 171 of 2025


               HC-KAR




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                          BEFORE
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                          CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 171 OF 2025
               BETWEEN:

               1.    S C BASAVARAJU @ S C BASAVARAJAIAH,
                     S/O. LATE. CHENNALINGAPPA,
                     AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS,
                     R/AT NO.890, DR. M.C.MODI HIOSPITAL ROAD,
                     MAHALAXMIPURAM POST,
                     BENGALURU - 560 086.
                                                            ...PETITIONER
               (BY SRI. DESHPANDE AMIT ANAND, ADVOCATE)

               AND:

               1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                     BY KADUR POLICE STATION,
Digitally            REPTD. BY SPP,
signed by
KAVYA R              HIGH COURT BUILDING,
Location:            BENGALURU - 560 001.
High court
of Karnataka   2.    CRIMINAL OF INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT (CID),
                     CALRTON HOUSE, PALACE ROAD,
                     BENGALURU - 560 001.
                     REPTD. BY SPP,
                     HIGH COURT BUILDING,
                     BENGALURU - 560 001.

               3.    RAMESH D.V.,
                     S/O. VENKATASWAMY,
                             -2-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC:9461
                                         CRL.P No. 171 of 2025


HC-KAR




    AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
    R/AT DODDANAYAKANAHALLI,
    MALLAPURA POST, YAGATI HOBLI,
    KADUR TALUK,
    CHIKKAMGALURU DISTRICT - 577 140.
                                               ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, ADVOCATE)

     THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439(2) (FILED U/S.483(2)
BNSS) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED
TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION BY CANCELLING THE BAIL
IN OLD CRIME NO.288/2023 AND NEW CRIME NO.8/2024
REGISTERED BY THE CID POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/
120-B, 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC 1860.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY


                      ORAL ORDER

The defacto-complainant is before this Court in this

Criminal Petition filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.PC with a

prayer to set aside the order dated 26.12.2023 passed in

Crime No.288/2023 by the Court of the Principal Civil

Judge and JMFC, Kadur and the order dated 23.11.2024

NC: 2026:KHC:9461

HC-KAR

passed in Crl.RP.No.283/2023 by the Court of I Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR was registered by Kadur Police Station,

Chikkamagaluru against respondent No.3 herein and

others for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420,

465, 468, 471 of IPC. In the said case, the Jurisdictional

Magistrate vide order impugned dated 26.12.2023 had

granted regular bail to respondent No.3 herein who is

arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime No.288/2023 and the

said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the

defacto-complainant before the Court of I Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in

Crl.RP.No.283/2023. It is under these circumstances, the

defacto-complainant is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having

reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that

the anticipatory bail application filed by respondent No.3

NC: 2026:KHC:9461

HC-KAR

herein in Crl.P.No.11966/2023 was dismissed as

withdrawn before this Court on 20.12.2023 with liberty to

surrender before the Jurisdictional Court and file necessary

application seeking regular bail. He submits that learned

Magistrate without appreciating the seriousness of the

allegations made against the accused, had allowed bail

application filed under Section 437 of Cr.PC on the same

day. He submits that absolutely no reasons were assigned

by the learned Magistrate to grant regular bail to accused

No.1. Learned District Judge has failed to appreciate the

said aspect of the matter and has erred in dismissing

Crl.RP.No.283/2023. Accordingly, he prays to allow this

petition.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3

submits that investigation of the case is already completed

and charge sheet is now filed against respondent No.3 and

others by CID Police in Crime No.8/2024. Therefore, at

this stage, it is not necessary to cancel the bail granted to

respondent No.3, since he has co-operated with the police

NC: 2026:KHC:9461

HC-KAR

for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, he prays to

dismiss the petition.

6. FIR in the present case was registered against

respondent No.3 and others by Kaduru Police Station,

Chikkamagaluru in Crime No.288/2023 for offences

punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of

IPC. It appears that subsequently the case was transferred

to CID Police and FIR was registered in Crime No.8/2024.

In the said case, after completing investigation, charge

sheet is now filed for the aforesaid offences against

respondent No.3 and others. Therefore, it is apparent that

respondent No.3, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in the

FIR has co-operated with the police for the purpose of

investigation. Though, the order passed by the learned

Magistrate dated 26.12.2023 granting regular bail to

accused No.1 in Crime No.288/2023 is bereft of any

reason for granting bail to the accused, since, respondent

No.3 who is arraigned as accused No.1 in the FIR has

complied the bail conditions and also co-operated with the

NC: 2026:KHC:9461

HC-KAR

police for the purpose of investigation, I am of the opinion

that at this stage it may not be necessary to interfere with

the said order only for the reason that learned Magistrate

has not passed a reasoned order while granting bail to

accused No.1. It is also necessary to take into

consideration that the maximum punishment for the

alleged offences is imprisonment for a period of seven

years and the said offences are triable by the Court of

Magistrate.

7. For the purpose of cancellation of the bail

granted to the accused, which has got serious

consequences, the court needs to consider the gravity of

offence, the antecedents of the accused, his conduct after

release on bail and also the supervening circumstances. In

the present case undisputedly, the petitioner has complied

the bail conditions and has co-operated with the police for

the purpose of investigation. As stated earlier the alleged

offences are not very grave in nature. Under the

circumstances, I am of the opinion that this petition needs

NC: 2026:KHC:9461

HC-KAR

to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is

dismissed.

Sd/-

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter