[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Nithisha H S @ Nithish vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
CRL.P No. 15950 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15950 OF 2025
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. NITHISHA H S @ NITHISH
S/O. SATHISHA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
RESIDING AT HIRIKYATHANAHALLI
VILLAGE, GAVADAGERE HOBLI,
HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHIRAG G.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HUNSUR RURAL POLICE STATION
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX,
Digitally signed by
BENGALURU-560 001.
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
2. SATHISHA
KARNATAKA S/O. LATE KULLEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESIDING AT HIRIKYATANAHALLI
VILLAGE, HUNSUR TALUK,
MYSURU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1,
R2 - DEAD)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
CRL.P No. 15950 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C (U/S
483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
REGULAR BAIL UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNS IN CONNECTION
WITH CR.NO.28/2024 (SC.NO.5016/2024) PENDING BEFORE
THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
MYSURU, HUNSUR PUNISHABLE UNDER SECDTIONS 304, 302
OF IPC, REGISTERED IN HUNASUR RURAL POLICE STATION.
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 the sole accused under
Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
praying to grant bail in SC No.5016/2024 arising out of
Crime No.28/2024 of Hunusuru Rural Police Station
pending on the file of the learned VIII Additional District
and Sessions Judge, sitting at Hunsur, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 304 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the
learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent/State.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would
contend that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident and
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
HC-KAR
that the case of the prosecution is based entirely on
circumstantial evidence. CW1, who is the father of the
petitioner and the complainant in the case, died within one
week of filing the complaint and, therefore, could not be
examined. The prosecution has already examined the
material witnesses, and it has to now examine only three
Investigating officers. The petitioner is in judicial custody
since two years. There are no criminal antecedents of the
petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader for the respondent/State would contend that the
petitioner was last seen by CW17 near the spot and that
the petitioner had also brought his father to the spot. The
statement of the complainant who is the father the
petitioner has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC.
The trial is in progress. If the petitioner is granted bail, he
will flee from justice and not be available for further trial.
With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
HC-KAR
5. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court
has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed
on the spot.
6. The allegation against the petitioner as per
charge sheet is that he has committed murder of his
sister/Dhanushree and committed culpable homicide of his
mother/Anita. As per charge sheet, the petitioner took his
sister and mother to a tank in order to kill his
sister/deceased Dhanushree as she was loving a
Mohammaden boy aged 19 years. The petitioner stated to
have pushed the said Dhanushree in the tank, and at that
time, the mother came to rescue, and she also fell in the
tank. The petitioner stated to have taken Dhanushree
inside the tank at a distance. The said Dhanushree held
Anita and when petitioner was dragging Anita in order to
save her, the deceased/Dhanushree also held the saree of
Anita. On seeing the same, the petitioner also left his
mother, and thereafter both drowned and died.There are
no eyewitnesses to the incident and the case of the
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
HC-KAR
prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The trial
has been commenced and the material witnesses have
been examined and the prosecution has to examine only
the Investigating Officers. The petitioner is judicial custody
since last two years and as the material witnesses are
examined, there is no any threat by the petitioner to the
prosecution witnesses. There are no criminal incidents of
the petitioner.
7. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner
has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions.
In the result, the following:
ORDER,
i) The petition is allowed.
ii) The petitioner is granted bail SC No.5016/2024
arising out of Crime No.28/2024 of Hunusuru Rural Police
Station pending on the file of learned VIII Additional
District and Sessions Judge, sitting at Hunsur, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304 of IPC
subject to following conditions.
NC: 2026:KHC:10826
HC-KAR
a) The petitioner shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the
like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court.
b) The petitioner shall not tamper the
remaining prosecution witnesses.
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.: 42
