Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Landmark Decision on Judicial Custody Extensions

Court Rules Extension of Judicial Custody Without Accused's Presence is Illegal, Orders Immediate Release on Bail

In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice G Basavaraja, has allowed a criminal appeal, underscoring the illegality of extending judicial custody without the accused being physically or virtually present. The court's decision comes in response to an appeal filed by Charan H V, challenging the denial of bail and the extension of his judicial custody without due process.

The appellant, Charan H V, was arrested on September 15, 2025, in connection with a case registered under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The trial court had remanded him to judicial custody until September 30, 2025. However, on the day of the remand's expiration, the accused was not produced before the court, either in person or via video conferencing, and no new remand application was filed by the investigating officer.

Citing the Supreme Court's precedent in the case of Jigar Alias Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya v. State of Gujarat, the High Court emphasized that the presence of the accused is a mandatory requirement for the extension of judicial custody. The absence of the accused and failure to file a remand application rendered the detention illegal. The court noted that merely noting the next production date on a jail warrant, without a proper order, does not suffice for lawful custody.

In light of these findings, the High Court set aside the trial court's order denying bail and granted bail to the appellant. The court ordered Charan H V's release on a self-bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety of the like amount. It further instructed the appellant not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses and to refrain from indulging in similar offenses in the future.

This judgment reinforces the procedural safeguards enshrined in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, ensuring that the rights of the accused are protected during judicial processes. It serves as a crucial reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding legal standards and preventing arbitrary detention.

Bottom Line:

Extension of judicial custody without production of accused in person or virtually is illegal and violates mandatory provisions of law.

Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Sections 69, 89, 351(2), 483; SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 Section 3(2)(v).

Charan H V v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2812192