Sri Prajwal vs State Of Karnataka
2026 Latest Caselaw 2192 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri Prajwal vs State Of Karnataka on 12 March, 2026

Author: S Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty

                                              -1-
                                                         NC: 2026:KHC:14851
                                                    CRL.P No. 17616 of 2025


                   HC-KAR




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                           BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                    CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 17616 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /
                                      483(BNSS))

                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI PRAJWAL S/O BASAVARAJU,
                   AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
                   R/AT KEERTHY NAGARA,
                   MALAVALLI TOWN,
                   MALAVALLI TALUK,
                   MANDYA DISTRICT.
                                                                 ...PETITIONER

                   (BY SRI MANOJ S.N., ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                         BY MALAVALLI TOWN POLICE STATION,
Digitally signed         MANDYA DISTRICT,
by SWETA
KULKARNI                 REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KARNATAKA
                         BENGALURU.

                   2.    AYUSHA BANU W/O ABUBUKAR SIDDIQUI,
                         AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
                         R/A KEERTHINAGARA
                         MALAVALLI TOWN, MANDYA,
                         KARNATAKA-574130.
                                                              ...RESPONDENTS

                   (BY SRI RAJATH SUBRAMANYA, HCGP FOR R1;
                   V/O DTD. 27.02.2026 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2
                    IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
                               -2-
                                           NC: 2026:KHC:14851
                                     CRL.P No. 17616 of 2025


HC-KAR




     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN SPL.C
NO.153/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 323, 354(A), 354(D), 504, 506, 114 AND 376(2)(i)(n)
OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4, 6, 10, 12 AND 17 OF THE POCSO
ACT PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, FTSC-II, MANDYA ON THE BASIS OF THE FIR
REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.28/2024 UNDER SECTION 323, 324,
354(A), 354(D), 504, 506, 114 AND 376(2)(i)(n) OF IPC AND
SECTIONS 4, 6, 12 AND 17 OF POCSO ACT BY THE
RESPONDENT MALAVALLI TOWN POLICE ON SUCH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AS DEEMS FIT BY THIS COURT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY


                      ORAL ORDER

Accused No.1 in Special Case No.153/2024 pending

before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge,

FTSC-II, Mandya arising out of Crime No.28/2024

registered by Malavalli Town Police Station, Mandya for

offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 354(A),

354(D), 504, 114, 506, 376(2)(i)(n) of Indian Penal Code,

1860 and Sections 4, 6, 10, 12 and 17 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is before this

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

Court in this successive bail application filed under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1. Respondent No.2, who is served in the matter, has

remained unrepresented before this Court.

3. FIR in Crime No.28/2024 was registered by

Malavalli Town Police Station, Mandya against petitioner

and others for the aforesaid offences based on the first

information dated 29.03.2024 received from respondent

No.2 who is the maternal aunt of the victim girl. During

the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested

on 29.03.2024 and subsequently he was remanded to

judicial custody. His bail application filed before the

jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected and therefore,

he had approached this Court in Criminal Petition

No.9012/2024 which was dismissed on 21.11.2024.

Subsequently, petitioner had filed a fresh bail application

before the Trial Court in Special Case No.153/2024 which

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

was rejected on 25.11.2025. It is under these

circumstances, petitioner is before this Court in this

successive bail petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is aged about 20 years and is in custody for

the last nearly two years. Material charge sheet witnesses

have been examined in the present case. Out of the 33

charge sheet witnesses, till date only 2 charge sheet

witnesses have been examined. He submits that there is a

lot of inconsistency and contradictions in the statement of

the material charge sheet witnesses as found in the charge

sheet compared to their depositions. He accordingly,

prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader opposed the petition on the ground that material

charge sheet witnesses have supported the case of the

prosecution. Petitioner along with other accused have

committed a heinous crime. Accordingly, he prays to

dismiss the petition.

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

6. First information in the present case was

submitted by respondent No.2 who is the maternal aunt of

the victim girl, who was studying in 10th standard. In the

first information it is stated that on 28.03.2024 when the

first informant had enquired with her elder sister, who is

the mother of the victim girl, about the whereabouts of the

victim girl, she was informed by her elder sister that the

victim girl had gone to her friend's house for handing over

a book. Thereafter, the first informant allegedly went near

the house of the victim's friend Ansiya and found that

victim's chappal were left outside the house of fourth

accused, who is the mother of the petitioner. Therefore,

the first informant entered the house of the fourth accused

and found that petitioner was inappropriately touching the

chest and other parts of the victim girl. Immediately the

first informant brought the victim girl to her house and on

enquiry the victim girl allegedly had informed her that

accused Nos.1 to 3, on various dates, had committed

sexual assault on her after threatening her that they would

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

circulate the video which they had in their mobile phone.

It is under these circumstances, FIR was registered

against the petitioner and four others for the aforesaid

offences.

7. The earlier bail application of the petitioner in

Criminal Petition No.9012/2024 was dismissed by this

Court on 21.11.2024 for the reason that the Trial Court

had issued witness summons to CWs-1 and 2, who are the

first informant and victim girl respectively, and at that

stage if the accused were to be enlarged on bail, the

chances of they tampering with the material prosecution

witnesses cannot be ruled out. It is now brought to the

notice of this Court that CWs-1 and 2 have already been

examined. Therefore, the apprehension that the petitioner

may tamper with the material charge sheet witnesses is

not there. Petitioner who is a youngster aged about 20

years is in judicial custody for the last nearly two years.

Out of the 33 charge sheet witnesses cited in the present

case, only two charge sheet witnesses namely CWs-1 and

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

2 have been examined before the Trial Court as on this

day. Therefore, chances of the trial being completed and

the case being disposed of on merits in the near soon is

very remote.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Javed

Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and

another, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, wherein, at

paragraph No.17, it has observed as under:

"17. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime."

9. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter

and also the period of petitioner's incarceration, I am of

the opinion that without expressing any opinion on the

merits or demerits of the case, prayer made by the

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

petitioner for grant of bail is to be answered affirmatively.

Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

The Criminal Petition is allowed.

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in

Crime No.28/2024 of Malavalli Police Station, Mandya

district, registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 323, 324, 354(A), 354(D), 504, 114, 506 and

376(2)(i)(n) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4, 6,

10, 12 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 pending in Special Case No.153/2024

on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge

FTSC-II, Mandya subject to the following conditions:

a) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the

NC: 2026:KHC:14851

HC-KAR

Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

Sd/-

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

SWK List No.: 19 Sl No.: 4 CT:PK