The XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru has dismissed the regular bail application of 27-year-old Manas Rana, who is accused of attempting to murder his former partner in a violent home invasion. Presiding Judge Sri Manjunatha ruled that the gravity of the assault and the prima facie evidence presented by the prosecution warranted the continued detention of the accused to ensure the integrity of the trial.

The case, registered under Crime No. 267/2021 by the Hulimavu Police, involves serious charges under Sections 307 (Attempt to Murder), 448 (House Trespass), and 450 (House Trespass in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment for life) of the Indian Penal Code. The court noted that the victim, Kumari Binodini Kisan, suffered grievous injuries that could have proved fatal had there not been intervention.

The Violent Incident and Prosecution Case

The prosecution’s case is built upon the complaint lodged by Kumari Urmila Rohidas, a roommate and witness to the incident. According to court records, the accused, Manas Rana, and the victim, Binodini Kisan, were previously in a romantic relationship but had separated due to Rana’s allegedly abusive and quarrelsome behavior.

On the morning of December 12, 2021, at approximately 10:00 a.m., Rana allegedly trespassed into the victim’s residence and initiated a heated argument. Although the complainant managed to pacify the situation temporarily, Rana returned later that afternoon at around 1:00 p.m., armed with an iron machete.

The prosecution alleged that Rana entered the house with the specific intent and knowledge to kill the victim. He launched a brutal attack, repeatedly striking Binodini Kisan with the machete. The victim sustained deep, grievous wounds on both her right and left forearms, wrists, and hands while attempting to defend herself. The medical reports and wound certificates submitted to the court confirmed the severity of these injuries.

Defense Arguments for Bail

Represented by advocate S. Bhagyalakshmi, Manas Rana sought bail on the grounds that he has been in judicial custody since December 19, 2021. The defense argued that the investigation is complete and a charge sheet has already been filed, meaning his presence is no longer required for further interrogation.

The petitioner’s counsel contended that there was no specific motive for murder and that the injuries occurred during a spontaneous altercation. Furthermore, the defense argued that Rana is a law-abiding citizen from a respectable family with no prior criminal antecedents, and that his family is suffering due to his prolonged incarceration.

Court’s Observations and Legal Precedents

In its detailed reasoning, the court dismissed the defense’s argument that the filing of a charge sheet weakened the case for detention. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Virupakshappa Gouda V. State of Karnataka, Judge Manjunatha emphasized that the filing of a charge sheet actually establishes that the prosecution has found sufficient evidence through investigation to proceed to trial.

The judge highlighted that while Section 307 is not necessarily punishable by death, it carries a penalty of up to ten years or life imprisonment, depending on the severity of the act. The court observed that the use of a lethal weapon like an iron machete and the targeting of a vulnerable person in their home underscored the “gravity and nature of the accusation.”

Referring to the established principles for granting bail, the court noted that it must consider the nature of the supporting evidence and the reasonable apprehension that the accused might tamper with witnesses or threaten the victim if released. The judge remarked that since the witnesses are closely related to the complainant and the victim, the risk of influence is substantial.

The court concluded that the petitioner failed to make out any valid ground for enlargement on bail. The judge stated that the mere duration of time spent in custody does not entitle an accused to bail in cases involving heinous crimes where the intent to kill is prima facie evident.

With the rejection of the bail petition (Crl.Misc. No.6020/2022), Manas Rana will remain in judicial custody as the case moves toward trial in the Sessions Court. The court emphasized that a judicious exercise of discretion is necessary to prevent the subversion of justice in such violent criminal matters.