[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Yogesha vs State By Periyapatna Police Station on 21 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
CRL.P No. 15264 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. 15264 OF 2025
(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. YOGESHA
S/O VEERABHADREGOWDA
AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/A JAVARIKOPPALU VILLAGE
PERIYAPATNA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT
PIN CODE NO 571107
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI AJY PRABHU M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HEMANTH KUMAR
S R.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA 1. STATE BY
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
PERIYAPATNA POLICE STATION
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
REP BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BANGALOE
PIN CODE 560001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL.SPP)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
CRL.P No. 15264 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 BAIL IN
PERIYAPATNA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 103(1) OF BNS ACT IN SC.NO.5028/2025, PENDING
BEFORE THE HONBLE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSION JUDGE, MYSURU, SITTING AT HUNSUR.
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 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
praying to grant bail in SC No.5028/2025 arising out of
Crime No.92/2025 of Periyapatna Police Station registered
for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of
Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 pending on the file of the
VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru sitting
at Hunsur.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the
learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for
respondent/State.
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
HC-KAR
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would
contend that CWs.8, 12, and 13, who are cited as
eyewitnesses, have been falsely planted. In the MLC
intimation it is stated that the assailants were unknown
persons. CWs.8, 12 and 13 have not taken any steps to
shift the injured to the hospital. The injured has been
shifted to the hospital by his brother. On the day of
incident itself at 02.45 p.m. the petitioner has been
arrested. On perusal of Section 183 of BNSS statement of
C.W.13, he is not an eyewitness to the incident. The
petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.04.2025 and as
charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further
custodial interrogation. With this he prayed to allow the
petition.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional State Public
Prosecutor for respondent/State would contend that the
incident had been witnessed by CW8, 12 and 13. CW8, in
his statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS,
has specifically stated that this petitioner assaulted the
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
HC-KAR
deceased on the head with a club three to four times. The
injured was taken for treatment and subsequently
succumbed to the injuries on 29.04.2025. The charge
sheet materials show a prima case against the petitioner.
With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court
has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed
on record.
6. As per charge sheet, the case of the
prosecution is that the land of this petitioner is situated
near the land of the deceased. The petitioner had
constructed his house in his land, and was residing there
with family. The deceased was talking with the wife of the
petitioner, and they developed close friendship. At that
time, the wife of this petitioner left his house and went
somewhere. The petitioner thought that the deceased is
the reason for his wife leaving the house, as he had
relationship with her. In that regard, on 06.04.2025 at
about 10.00 a.m. when the deceased was returning from
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
HC-KAR
the land to his house, at that time, he went from his back
side and assaulted on his head with club three to four
times, and he fell down, and he was taken to hospital, and
he succumbed to injuries on 29.04.2025.
7. In the charge sheet, CWs.8, 12 and 13 have
been cited as eyewitnesses. The statement of CW13 has
also been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. On perusal
of the said statement, he is not the eyewitness to the
incident, and he came subsequently and saw the injured
fallen on the spot. The statement of CW8 has been
recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. In the said
statement, CW8 has specifically stated the act of this
petitioner assaulting the deceased with a club on his head,
and at that time, CW13 and CW12 coming from their land,
and they intimating the brothers of the deceased, who
came to the spot in an auto rickshaw and subsequently
injured was taken to the hospital in the ambulance.
Considering the said aspect, there is a prima face case
against the petitioner for the offence alleged against the
NC: 2026:KHC:10802
HC-KAR
petitioner. The offence alleged against the petitioner is a
heinous offence punishable with death or imprisonment for
life. If the petitioner is granted bail, there are chances of
him threatening the eye witnesses and other prosecution
witnesses.
8. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner
has not made out any grounds for grant of bail.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
BKM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39
