SRI MADESHA @ BANDE MADESHA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 483
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 114, 120B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. After disposal of Crl.P.No.5613/2025 by this Court since the accused persons had filed applications seeking their - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30799 CRL.P No. 6240 of 2026 HC-KAR discharge, it appears that there was a delay in framing of charges. Therefore, the cause for delay…
Judgment
SRI MADESHA @ BANDE MADESHA S/O VENKATESH R/A CHOODENAHALLI VILLAGE AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, KASABA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK - 562 106 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. (BY SRI HARISH PRABHU S, ADV.) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KODIHALLI STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001. …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SC.NO.5005/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.108/2021 REGISTERED BY KODIHALLI P.S., RAMNAGAR DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 120(B),114,302 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE 2nd ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT, SITTING AT KANAKAPURA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:30799 CRL.P No. 6240 of 2026 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER
Accused No.6 in SC No.5005/2025 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Benglauru South District, sitting at Kanakapura, arising out of Crime No.108/2021 registered by Kodihalli Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 114, 302 and 149 of IPC, is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.6 in the charge sheet which is filed in the present case for the aforesaid offences. After the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.12498/2024, which was dismissed on merits by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated
12.12.2024. Petitioner had filed a fresh bail application before this Court in Crl.P.No.5613/2025, which was dismissed on
06.06.2025 with an observation that the Trial Court shall - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30799 CRL.P No. 6240 of 2026 HC-KAR dispose off the criminal case pending against the petitioner expeditiously. Thereafter, petitioner Crl.P.No.359/2026, which was dismissed as withdrawn before this Court on 06.03.2026 with liberty to file a fresh petition. The petitioner is now before this Court seeking regular bail on the ground of delay in trial.
Perusal of the order sheet of the Trial Court made available to this Court would reveal that the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.5613/2025 wherein a request is made to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and dispose off the case on merits at the earliest, was never placed before the Trial Court. After disposal of Crl.P.No.5613/2025, some of the accused persons had filed discharge applications before the Trial Court and after disposal of the said discharge applications, the Trial Court has framed charge in the present case on 03.12.2025. The Trial Court has now issued directions to the Investigation Officer to produce the case properties and the matter is now adjourned for the said purpose.
Operative part
After disposal of Crl.P.No.5613/2025 by this Court since the accused persons had filed applications seeking their - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30799 CRL.P No. 6240 of 2026 HC-KAR discharge, it appears that there was a delay in framing of charges. Therefore, the cause for delay cannot be attributed either to the Court or to the prosecution and on the other hand, the delay has occurred because of the conduct of the accused, who have filed discharge applications, having made a request before this Court for the disposal of the case. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Sessions case, which is now pending as against the petitioner and other accused, is a split- up case and the other accused, who were tried for the charge sheeted offences in SC No.5001/2024, have been convicted after a full-fledged trial. The petitioner and other accused, who are now being tried in the split-up case had absconded during trial in SC No.5001/2024 and it is under these circumstances, split-up case has been registered against them in SC No.5005/2025. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail in this successive bail application cannot be entertained at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 83
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 114, 120B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.