Karnataka High Court
CRL.A/540/2026 of CHAVALI SANTU @ SANTHU Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 6 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:33606 CRL.A No. 540 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 540 OF 2026 (U/S 14( A ) (2)) BETWEEN: CHAVALI SANTU @ SANTHU, S/O PARAMESHNAIK, AGED 29 YEARS, R/O 4TH
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 540 OF 2026 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
CHAVALI SANTU @ SANTHU,
S/O PARAMESHNAIK,
AGED 29 YEARS,
R/O 4TH CROSS,
KABBURU BASAPPA NAGARA,
BHARATH COLONY,
DAVANAGERE – 577 003.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. SAROJA H M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH VIDYANAGAR
POLICE STATION,
DAVANAGERE,
REPRESENTED THROUGH THE
LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
2.
SHRUTHI.T.K,
W/O LATE SANTHOSH KUMAR. K,
Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI B
S
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
@ KANUMA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
AGE 36 YEARS,
NEAR KHADI KENDRA,
NITTUVALLI,
DAVANAGERE - 577 004.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA., HCGP FOR R1; SMT. HALEEMA AMEEN., ADVOCATE FOR
R2 - DEFACTO COMPLAINANT)
----
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING TO ENLARGE
THE APPELLANT HEREIN ON BAIL/INTERIM BAIL TO UNDERGO
MEDICAL TREATMENT/OPERATION FOR REMOVAL OF BULLET
IN RELATION TO MATTER BEARING CRIME NO.103/2025 NOW
SPL.CASE NO.346/2025 REGISTERED WITH THE VIDYANAGAR
POLICE STATION, DAVANGERE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 61(2), 103 (1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(30, 238(a) READ WITH SECTION0.190 OF BNSS, 2023, AND SECTION.27(1) AND (5) OF THE INDIAN ARMS ACT, 1959
AND SEC.3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST ACT 1989, PENDING ON
FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
DAVANGERE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
HC-KAR
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
This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused No.1 seeking to set aside the order dated 15.10.2025 passed in Spl.C.No.346/2025 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere and to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.103/2025 registered by Vidyanagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 238(a), 61(2) r/w Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and Section 27(1) and (5) of Indian Arms Act, 1959.
2. The submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is a victim of Police negligence and indiscriminate firing. Consequently, the appellant had sustained injury on his right knee with a bullet lodged inside his leg. There is medical emergency to the appellant and the said bullet has to be removed from his knee through proper surgery.
3. In support of the said contention, the learned Senior Counsel made available multiple reports of the hospitals and prays to grant the relief as prayed for in the appeal.
HC-KAR
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently opposed in granting the relief as prayed for in the appeal and stated that the appellant is a rowdy element and he has committed heinous offence. The appellant has committed murder of one Santhosh Kumar by conspiring with others. The manner in which the appellant hatched the plan and committed murder would indicate its gravity and seriousness. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant the relief as prayed for in the appeal.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State adopted the argument advanced by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and prays to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the charge sheet and also medical records made available by the learned Senior Counsel, I am of the considered opinion that if the appellant is enlarged on bail for a limited period considering his medical emergency, it would meet the ends of justice. It is needless to state that merit of the case is not required to be discussed at
HC-KAR
this stage since this appeal has been considered on the ground of medical emergency. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.103/2025 of respondent - Police, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:
a) The appellant is released on bail for a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
b) The appellant shall surrender before the concerned Court immediately after expiry of six months.
c) The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses.
d) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates.
HC-KAR
iii) In case, the appellant violates any of the conditions stated above, the liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE
NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22