Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/2709/2026 of SRI RAJESH B N Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 9 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:19592 CRL.P No. 2709 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2709 OF 2026(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. RAJESH. B. N., S/O. NAGARAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2709 OF
2026(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI. RAJESH. B. N.,
S/O. NAGARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT. BHEEMANAKUNTE VILLAGE,
Y.N. HOSAKOTE HOBLI,
PAVAGADA TALUK,
TUMKURU (D) - 561202.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VENKATA REDDY C.M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
Y.N. HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION,
PAVAGADA TALUK,
TUMKURU (D).
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2.
VICTIM GIRL
XXX
D/O. LATE CHIKKAHANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/A. YARRAPALYA VILLAGE,
PAVAGADA TALUK,
TUMKURU (D)-561 202.
Digitally
signed by
PAVITHRA
N
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH. N, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER OF REGULAR BAIL IN
S.C. NO. 5022/2025, (CRIME NO. 58/2025) FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCE U/S 64 (2)(M), 69, 318(2), 352, 351(2) OF BNS, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSION JUDGE AT TUMAKURU, SITTING AT MADDHUGIRI.THE
IV
ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT
AND
SESSION
JUDGE
AT
TUMAKURU, SITTING AT MADDHUGIRI HAS REJECTED THE
BAIL PETITION ON 19.12.2025 IN CRL.MISC.NO.5348/2025.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
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 ORDER
The petitioner is before this seeking regular bail in Crime No.58/2025 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m),69, 318(2), 352, 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru sitting at Madhugiri.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.07.2025, the Administrative Officer of Sakhi-I Staff Centre, Department of Women and Child Development,
HC-KAR
Tumakuru, lodged a complaint stating that the victim, Ramanjinamma, appeared before the Pavagada Centre and reported that about seven years earlier, she had met the petitioner Rajesh and they developed intimacy. It is alleged that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the victim. As a result of the said relationship, the victim gave birth to a female child on 19.04.2025 at the Government Hospital, Gowribidanur. However, thereafter, he refused to marry her. Hence, the complaint.
3. Based on the said complaint, the respondent /police registered the case, conducted the investigation and submitted the charge sheet.
4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and he is innocent of the alleged offences. It is submitted that the statement of the victim recorded before the learned Magistrate under Section 183 of the BNS, 2023, clearly discloses that the petitioner had married the
HC-KAR
victim and that they were living together as husband and wife. It is further submitted that certain differences of opinion arose between the couple, and in the meantime, the victim approached the complainant. The complainant, being an officer, lodged the complaint only with the intention of teaching a lesson to the petitioner.
5. It is further submitted that the ingredients of the offences invoked in the FIR and charge sheet are not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail by imposing suitable conditions; those conditions would be abided by the petitioner in the event of his release on bail. Making such a submission, he prays to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State vehemently submitted that there is a threat to the victim. It is submitted that the petitioner had deceived the victim on a false promise of marriage, and on that pretext, he had committed sexual
HC-KAR
intercourse with her. However, after the victim gave birth to a female child, the petitioner has not shown any inclination to marry her.
6. It is further submitted that, under such circumstances, the victim approached the officials of the Sakhi-I Staff Centre, who in turn, lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police. The manner in which the petitioner treated the victim would indicate his dishonest intention to cheat her from the beginning. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such a submission, the learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the charge sheet. It appears from the record that the victim and the petitioner were acquainted with each other. As per the averments made in the statement recorded before the learned Magistrate, the petitioner had promised to marry the
HC-KAR
victim. Subsequently, with the intervention of the police and the elders, the petitioner married the victim at the temple of Rayamma situated at Yaragunte. After the marriage, the petitioner and the victim lived together as husband and wife at Manjunath Nagar, Bengaluru. Considering the said statement and also the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that will take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. As a result, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.58/2025 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 318(2), 352, 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru sitting at Madhugiri on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
HC-KAR
iii) The petitioner shall neither threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.
iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.
v) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal offences till disposal of the case.
In case the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file a necessary application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE
BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2