Karnataka High Court
CRL.A/1476/2026 of PRASHANTH KUMAR Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 23 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010606822026 NC: 2026:KHC:52699 CRL.A No. 1476 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1476 OF 2026 (U/S 14( A ) (2)) BETWEEN: 1. PRASHANTH KUMAR S/O CHANDRAPPA,
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1476 OF 2026 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
1.
PRASHANTH KUMAR
S/O CHANDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
PRESENT ADDRESS: C/O INDRAVENI,
2ND CROSS, OM SHAKTHI LAYOUT,
SHIKARIPALYA, MARAGONDANAHALLI,
ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-560102.
PERMANENT ADDRESS:
HYADARAHALLI VILLAGE,
HIRE HADALAGI HOBLI,
HOVINAHADALAGI TALUKU,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. DARSHAN M S.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
STATE BY HEBBAGODI P.S.
RPTD. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE- 560 001.
2.
SMT. RENUKA,
W/O ANANDA KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
NEAR ELINA APARTMENT,
MARAGONDANAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
SHIKARIPALYA VILLAGE,
JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BENGALURU-562106
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1,
V/O DTD: 18/9/26 - SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT.)
CRL.A FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT BY THE
ADVOCATE
FOR
THE
APPELLANT
PRAYING
THAT
THIS
HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE II ADDL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BENGALURU RURAL IN CRL.MISC.NO.1058/2026 DATED
15.07.2026 AND PASS AN ORDER OF BAIL ENLARGING THE
APPELLANT IN CR.NO.543/2025 OF HEBBAGODI POLICE NOW
IN
SPL.C.NO.18/2026
AND
PENDING
TRIAL
BEFORE
II
ADDL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU RURAL FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 103(1),238 OF BNS ACT 2023 AND
SEC.3(2)(V) OF SC/ST ACT 2015.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 15.07.2026 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1058/2026 by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (for short, 'the trial Court')
HC-KAR
2. On the basis of the complaint filed by Smt. Renuka, Hebbagodi Police have registered the case in Crime No.543/2025 against the appellant/accused Prashanth Kumar for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 103(1) of BNS 2023 and Section 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989. The accused was arrested on 16.10.2025 and produced before the Court. He was remanded to judicial custody. The application was filed under Section 483 of BNSS, same came to be dismissed by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the dismissal order, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
3. After investigation, the IO has submitted the charge sheet against the accused. In column number 17 of the charge sheet, it is stated as under:
"F PÉù£À ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä ªÀAiÀĸÀÄì-32 ªÀµÀð gÀªÀgÀÄ ¥Àj²µÀÖ eÁwUÀ¼À, ªÀiÁAUï (Mang) G¥ÀeÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. CAPÀt-12gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ DgÉÆæAiÀiÁzÀ ¥Àæ±ÁAvï PÀªÀiÁägï JA§ÄªÀ£ÀÄ ¥ÀæªÀUÀð-II (J) «±ÀéPÀªÀÄð eÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
HC-KAR
CAPÀt-12gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ PÉù£À ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¦æÃw¹ 2025£Éà ¸Á°£À ¥sÉçÄæªÀj wAUÀ¼À°è «ªÁºÀ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛ£É. F »AzÉAiÉÄà gÉõÁä gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀįÉÃAzÀgï JA§ÄªÀgÀ eÉÆvÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄÄA¨ÉÊAiÀÄ°è «ªÁºÀ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArzÀÝgÀÄ. EªÀjUÉ £À«ÃPÁ JA§ 15 ªÀµÀðzÀ ªÀÄUÀ½zÀÄÝ, ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä gÀªÀgÀÄ ¥Àæ±ÁAvï PÀªÀiÁägï gÀªÀgÀ eÉÆvÉ 2£Éà «ªÁºÀ DzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ DgÉÆæ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ £À«ÃPÁ gÀªÀgÀ eÉÆvÉ ªÁ¸ÀªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. PÉù£À ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä gÀªÀgÀÄ DgÉÆæ ¥Àæ±ÁAvï PÀªÀiÁägï gÀªÀjUÉ ¦æÃw¹ ªÀÄzÀÄªÉ DzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÁQë ¥ÀgÀªÉÄñÀégÀ JA§ÄªÀgÀ eÉÆvÉ ¥sÉÇÃ£ï £À°è CwAiÀiÁV ¸À®ÄUɬÄAzÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄwÛgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä¼ÀÄ ¥ÀgÀªÉÄñÀégÀ gÀªÀgÀ eÉÆvÉ ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ ¥Àæ²ß¸ÀÄwÛzÁÝUÀ ªÀÄÈvÉAiÀÄÄ ¥ÀævÀÄåvÀÛgÀ ¤ÃqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. DUÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ ªÀÄÈvÉUÉ ¤ªÀÄä §Ä¢Ý vÉÆÃj¸ÀÄ ©nÖAiÀiÁ QüÀÄ eÁwUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀÄÝ, £Á£ÀÄ ¤£ÀߣÀÄß ¦æÃw¹ ªÀÄzÀÄªÉ ªÀiÁrPÉÆAzÀÄ vÀ¥ÀÅà ªÀiÁrzÉà ªÀiÁ¢UÀ ªÀÄÄAqÉ JAzÀÄ ¨ÉÊzÀÄ eÁw ¤AzÀ£É ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛgÀÄvÁÛ£É.
¢£ÁAPÀ 15/10/2025 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄzsÁåºÀß 3-00 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ°è DgÉÆæ ¥Àæ±ÁAvï PÀªÀiÁägï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄÈvÉ gÉõÁä E§âgÀÄ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ºÉ§âUÉÆÃr ¥Éǰøï gÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀzÀÄÝ, ²PÁj¥Á¼Àå, ªÀiÁgÀUÉÆAqÀ£ÀºÀ½î, J¯É£Á- 5 C¥Ámïð ªÉÄAmï ºÀwÛgÀ, 2£Éà PÁæ¸ï, £ÀA§gï-65gÀ°ègÀĪÀ ¸ÁQë-EA¢gÀªÉÃt gÀªÀgÀ ¨ÁrUÉ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÁUÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ ªÉÄÊvÉUÉ ¥sÉÇÃ£ï £À°è ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝ §UÉÎ ¥Àæ²ß¹gÀÄvÁÛ£É. DUÀ ªÀÄÈvÉAiÀÄÄ DgÉÆæUÉ «ÄAræUÉ ºÀÄnÖzÀ ¸ÀÆ¼É ªÀÄUÀ£É ¤£Àß §Ä¢Þ ¤Ã£ÀÄ ¸ÁAiÉÆêÀgÉUÀÆ ©qÀĪÀÅ¢®è JAzÀÄ ¨ÉÊ¢zÀÄÝ, DUÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ PÉÆÃ¥ÀUÉÆAqÀÄ gÉõÁäUÉ PÀ¥Á¼ÀPÉÌ ºÉÆqÉ¢gÀÄvÁÛ£É. DUÀ gÉõÁä¼ÀÄ DgÉÆæUÉ ºÉÆqÉAiÀÄ®Ä ¥ÀæAiÀÄwß¹zÁUÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ gÉõÁä¼À£ÀÄß ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ ¸ÉÆÃ¥sÁ ªÉÄÃ¯É vÀ½î, £ÀAvÀgÀ JgÀqÀÄ PÉÊUÀ¼À°è, gÉõÁä¼À PÀÄwÛUÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ©VAiÀiÁV »rzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ PÀvÀÄÛ »¸ÀÄQ G¹gÀÄUÀnÖ¹ PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÁÛ£É. £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÁPÁëöåzsÁgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £Á±À¥Àr¸À®Ä ªÀÄÈvÀ zÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß J¼ÉzÀÄ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ ¨Ávï
HC-KAR
gÀƪÀiï £À¯Éè gÉõÁä¼À ªÀÄÈvÀ zÉúÀªÀ£ÀÄß ºÁQ ©¹ ¤ÃgÀÄ PÁ¬Ä¸ÀĪÀ »Ãlgï ¹éZï D£ï ªÀiÁr ºÉÆÃVgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ vÀ¤SÁ PÁ®zÀ°è ¸ÀAUÀ滹gÀĪÀ ¸ÁPÁëzsÁgÀUÀ½AzÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÁQëzÁgÀgÀÄUÀ¼À ºÉýPÉUÀ½AzÀ zsÀÈqÀ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
DzÀÝjAzÀ DgÉÆæAiÀÄ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÉÄîÌAqÀ PÀ®A UÀ¼À C£ÀéAiÀÄ zÉÆõÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ªÉâ¹PÉÆArgÀÄvÀÛzÉ."
4. The Post-mortem report reveals that the cause of death is due to asphyxia as a result of throttling. The averments made in the complaint itself reveals that the accused has confessed before the complainant that he has slapped and squeezed the neck of the deceased and dragged her to bathroom. The commission of alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The Special Court has properly appreciated the materials on record in a proper perspective manner. I do not find any legal or factual error in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE
DHA