Criminal Petition No. 7445 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7445 OF 2025 BETWEEN: GOVINDARAJU @ GUNDA @ AUTO JAKI S/O LATE VENKATARAMU AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.96, 9 A CROSS ARUNDATHI NAGARA GANGAGONDANAHALLI BANGALORE - 560 073. (BY SRI RAVIKUMARA B.R, ADV.) AND: STATE BY KORATEGERE POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING - 560 001. …PETITIONER Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL TO THIS PETITIONER IN CR.NO.220/2024(NOW NUMBERED AS S.C.NO.5008/2025 ON THE FILE OF 4TH ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT MADHUGIRI, TUMAKURU FOR THE ALLEGED OFFNECE P/U/S 103,61,190,351(2) OF BNS 2023 PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C COURT, KORATAGERE, TUMKUR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Accused No.1 in Crime No.220/2024 registered by Koratagere Police Station, Tumakuru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 61, 190 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3.
Legal Reasoning
FIR in Crime No.220/2024 was registered by Koratagere Police Station, Tumakuru District initially for the offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS, 2023, against the petitioner and two others. During the course of investigation, the petitioner herein was arrested on30.07.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. 4. The bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR Crl.Misc.No.5110/2025 was dismissed on 24.04.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Accused Nos.2, 4 & 5 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.2908/2025 and Crl.P.No.261/2025 C/w Crl.P.No.314/2025. He submits that, the petitioner was not served with the grounds of arrest by the police at the time of his arrest and therefore in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar VS State of Haryana and Another - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269, the petitioner is entitled for bail. He also submits that, the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. 6. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition on the ground that there are sufficient material to connect the petitioner to the crime. However, on instruction she submits that, grounds of arrest has not - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR been served on the petitioner in the present case. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the petition. 7. The material on record would go to show that
Legal Reasoning
on 28.07.2024 at about 11.00 p.m, one Sri Partha, who had appeared before the Koratagere Police Station had informed that on the said date he had found a person lying on the road side with injury and he had admitted the said person to the hospital and he also had mentioned that the said person was Prakash Jamadar, husband of Smt. Harshita (accused No.2). Prakash Jamadar, who was admitted in the hospital was declared dead and therefore a UDR case was registered in UDR No.27/2024. 8. The postmortem report of the deceased Prakash Jamadar would reveal that the death was due to hemorrhage as a result of stab injury to the chest of the deceased Prakah Jamadar. On enquiry, Investigation Officer learnt that Harshitha had left her husband and had stayed in the house of accused No.1 - Govindaraju with whom she had illicit relationship and thereafter she - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR returned home and there was a quarrel between the husband and wife. It is in this background, FIR has been registered against the petitioner, Harshitha and others. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 30.07.2024 and after investigation charge sheet is now filed against six persons. 9. The allegation in the charge sheet is that the petitioner had assaulted Prakash Jamadar on 28.07.2024 with a deadly weapon and accused Nos.2 to 6 had held the deceased so as to enable the petitioner to assault him with a deadly weapon and commit his murder. The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and it is in this background accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.2908/2025 and Crl.P.No.261/2025 C/w Crl.P.No.314/2025. Undisputedly, the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. He is in custody from 30.07.2024. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that grounds of arrest was not served on the petitioner in the present case. The said submission has not seriously disputed by the learned HCGP and on instruction she has admitted that grounds of arrest has not been served on the petitioner in the present cae. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PANKAJ BANSAL VS UNION OF INDIA - (2024)7 SCC 576 and PRABIR PURKAYASTHA VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) (2024)8 SCC 254, has held that service of grounds of arrest on the accused who is arrested is mandatory and failure to comply the said requirement would entitle the accused for bail. 12. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PANKAJ BANSAL (supra) and PRABIR PURKAYASTHA (supra) has been reiterated in the case of Vihaan Kumar VS State of Haryana and Another - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in the said case the Hon'ble Supreme - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR Court has held that the grounds of arrest is not only required to be served on the accused who is arrested but the same is also required to be communicated to his friends and relatives. 13. In paragraph No.14 of the order passed in the case of Vihaan Kumar (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "Thus, the requirement of informing the person arrested of the grounds of arrest is not a formality but a mandatory constitutional requirement. Article 22 is included in Part III of the Constitution under the heading of Fundamental Rights. Thus, it is the fundamental right of every person arrested and detained in custody to be informed of the grounds of arrest as soon as possible. If the grounds of arrest are not informed as soon as may be after the arrest, it would amount to a violation of the fundamental right of the arrestee guaranteed under Article 22(1). It will also amount to depriving the arrestee of his liberty. The reason is that, as provided in Article 21, no person can be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. The procedure established by law also includes what is provided in Article 22(1). Therefore, when a person is arrested without a warrant, and the grounds of arrest are not - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR informed to him, as soon as may be, after the arrest, it will amount to a violation of his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 as well. In a given case, if the mandate of Article 22 is not followed while arresting a person or after arresting a person, it will also violate fundamental right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21, and the arrest will be rendered illegal. On the failure to comply with the requirement of informing grounds of arrest as soon as may be after the arrest, the arrest is vitiated. Once the arrest is held to be vitiated, the person arrested cannot remain in custody even for a second." 14. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered view that, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively. 15. Accordingly, the following:
Decision
ORDER Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.220/2024 registered by Koratagere Police - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:18674 CRL.P No. 7445 of 2025 HC-KAR Station, Tumakuru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 61, 190 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 , subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) 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 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; Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS