Alwin Jayakumar V vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Jun 23, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1544398

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1544398
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: S Vishwajith Shetty
Decided On: Jun 23, 2026
Case Number: CRL.P/6313/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Alwin Jayakumar V

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....been grantedinterim bail by the coordinate bench of this court by order23.04.2026 which is in operation as on this date. it is not the case of the prosecution that petitioner has violated any of the bail conditions imposed by this court vide order dated 23.04.2026. under the circumstances, i am of the opinion that -4- petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. accordingly, the following order:6. the petition is allowed. the petitioner is directed to beenlarged on bail in crime no.111/2026 registered by amruthahalli police station, bengaluru city, for the offences punishable under sections 109(1), 190, 249 of bns, 2023, subject to the following conditions: a) petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of rs.1,00,000/- 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; -5- e) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without permission of the said court until the case registered against him is disposed off. sd/- (s vishwajith shetty) judge kk list no.: 1 sl no.: 69

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6313 OF 2026 BETWEEN: ALWIN JAYAKUMAR V S/O VIJILING AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT. NO.67, NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE, JANATHA COLONY HEBBAL KEMPAPURA BENGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADV.) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS AMRUTHAHALLI POLICE STATION BENGALURU, REP. BY HIGH COURT SPP BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADLL. SPP)

Digitally signed by THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) NANDINI M S Location: PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL, IN HIGH COURT OF CR.NO.111/2026 OF AMRUTHAHALLI P.S. AND ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA CRL.MISC.NO.3416/2026 BEFORE THE COURT OF THE LXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-65) AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 109(1), 190, 249 OF BNS 2023.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER

WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY -2-

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused no.8 in Crime No.111/2026 registered by

Amruthahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 190, 249 of BNS, 2023, is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.111/2026 was registered by Amruthahalli

Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the aforesaid offences against Samuel and others based on the first information dated 24.03.2026 received from Manjunath S/o late Govindappa, who is one of the injured victim in the present case. In the said case, petitioner herein was arrested 04.04.2026 and remanded to judicial custody. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.3416/2026 was rejected on 16.04.2026. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that

the alleged incident had taken place on the intervening night of -3- 20.03.2026 and 21.03.2026, whereas first information has been filed belatedly on 24.03.2026, after a delay of three days. The first informant and another by name Chandru are the alleged victims in the present case. In the first information which is submitted belatedly, the first informant has mentioned in detail about the role played by each of the accused who have committed the offence. The first informant has named six accused who had assaulted him, his friend Chandru and has caused injuries.

5. Undisputedly, petitioner's name is not found in the FIR.

The allegation now made against the petitioner is that he had aided accused no.2 to escape from the spot of crime after the alleged incident had taken place in which the first informant and another were assaulted by accused nos.1 to 6. Petitioner herein who was arrested ini the present case has been granted

interim bail by the coordinate bench of this Court by order

23.04.2026 which is in operation as on this date. It is not the case of the prosecution that petitioner has violated any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2026. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that -4- petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:

6. The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be

enlarged on bail in Crime No.111/2026 registered by Amruthahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 190, 249 of BNS, 2023, subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- 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; -5- e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2026 Same Parties Alwin Jayakumar V vs State of Karnataka Same Judge S Vishwajith Shetty