[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
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
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
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.
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
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.
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
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
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
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:
NC: 2026:KHC:9472
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
