[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri.Satish Yadav vs State By Bandepalya Police Station on 2 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
CRL.P No. 14639 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14639 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /
483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI. SATISH YADAV
S/O YOGENDRA YADAV
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/O CEMENT SHEET HOUSE
C/O SMT. KALA
W/O YELLAPPA
AMBEDKARNAGAR
BEHIND GOVERNMENT SCHOOL
BANDEPALYA, BOMMANAHALLI POST
BENGALURU-560 068
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF
CHATTIYARI VILLAGE
BADAYAPAR POST
Digitally signed by DHAKVA BAZAR, GORAKPURA
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI UTTAR PRADESH-273 211
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...PETITIONER
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. SUDHARSHAN L, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY BANDEPALYA POLICE STATION
REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT
BENGALURU-560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
CRL.P No. 14639 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.PC
(FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL IN CR.NO.94/2025 AND IN CC.NO.33428/2025 ON
THE FILE OF BANDEPALYA P.S. AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF
IX ACJM, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 103(1), 238, 240, R/W SEC.3(5) OF BNS.
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 accused No.3 under Section
483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.94/2025 of
Bandepalya Police Station, registered for offences under
Section 103(1), 238, 240 r/w 3(5) of BNS.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and
learned HCGP for respondent/State.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that
there are no eye witnesses to the incident and the case of
the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Even
though CW.2 to CW.4 are cited as eye witnesses in the
charge sheet, but they are not eyewitnesses as per their
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
HC-KAR
statements. CW.2 has stated regarding extra judicial
confession made by accused No.2 and CW.4 has stated
regarding extra judicial confession made by accused No.3.
CW.3 is a land lady. She has stated the movements of
two, three friends of accused No.3 to the house of accused
No.3 on the date of incident. As the case of the
prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, the
prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances. The
petitioner is in judicial custody since 24.06.2025 and as
the charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further
custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents
of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that
CW.4 is a witness who has seen accused Nos.1 to 3 and
deceased together near the house of accused No.3. CW.2
has stated regarding extrajudicial confession made by
accused No.2 in his statement recorded under Section 183
of BNSS. CW.4 has stated regarding extrajudicial
confession made by accused No.3. One of the doctors who
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
HC-KAR
conducted PM examination of the dead body of the
deceased has opined that death is due to injury sustained.
The charge sheet material show prima-facie case against
the petitioner for offences alleged against him. With this,
he prayed to reject the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on
record.
6. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased
had disclosed the illicit relationship of accused No.1 with
the wife of his brother to accused Nos.2 and 3. Accused
No.1 enraged by that, in conspiracy with accused No.2 and
3 assaulted the deceased with hands on his face and
dashed his head to the wall and committed his murder in
the house of accused No.3.
7. The case of the prosecution is based on
circumstantial evidence. Even though CW.2 to CW.4 are
cited as eyewitnesses to the incident, but on perusal of
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
HC-KAR
their statements, they are not eyewitnesses to the
incident. CW.2 has stated regarding extrajudicial
confession made by accused No.2 and CW.4 has stated
regarding extrajudicial confession made by accused No.3.
CW.3 is a land lady of the house of accused No.3 and she
has stated the movements of friends of accused No.3 on
the day of incident. CW.4 has also stated regarding he last
seen the deceased and accused Nos.1 to 3 together on the
day of incident.
8. Considering the above aspects, the entire case of
the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence.
Therefore, each of the circumstances has to be proved at
trial. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 24.06.2025
and as the charge sheet filed, he is not required for
custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents
of the petitioner. Considering the above aspect, the
petitioner has made out case for grant of bail with
conditions. In the result, the following:
ORDER
NC: 2026:KHC:5812
HC-KAR
Petition is allowed. Petitioner is granted bail in Crime
No.94/2025 of Bandepalya Police Station, subject to
following conditions:
(i) 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 jurisdictional Court.
(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper the
prosecution witnesses either directly or
indirectly.
(iii) Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on
all dates of hearing unless exempted and
co-operate for speedy disposal of the
case.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DKB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10
