Karnataka High Court refuses anticipatory bail to MLA Byrathi Basavaraj in realtor-cum-rowdy-sheeter murder in Bengaluru

The High Court of Karnataka on February 10 declined to grant anticipatory bail to BJP MLA B.A. Basavaraj in the murder of Shivaprakash alias Bikla Shiva, a realtor-cum-rowdy-sheeter, who was killed on July 15, 2025.

Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav passed the order while rejecting the petition filed by Mr. Basavaraj. With this order, the interim anticipatory granted to him on December 26, 2025 got cancelled.

Initially Mr. Basavaraj, who has been arraigned as accused number-5 in the First Information Report (FIR), was booked on the charge of conspiracy and murder. He had filed a petition before the High Court challenging the FIR. In August 2025, the High Court had given him interim protection asking the police ‘not to take coercive step against him’.

However, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), which took over probe from the Bengaluru police, invoked provisions of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act (KCOCA), 2000 against all the accused persons, including the BJP MLA, during pendency of his petition against the FIR. This led him to file another petition before the High Court challenging invocation of KCOCA.

On December 19, 2025, the High Court quashed invocation of KCOCA against the MLA and other accused. Meanwhile, Mr. Basavaraj withdrew his petition challenging the FIR and sought anticipatory bail from the High Court, which told him to knock on the doors of the sessions court.

However, on December 23, 2025, the special court of sessions for criminal cases against present and former MPs and MLAs rejected his plea for anticipatory bail stating that the investigation against him and another accused is not complete even though the CID had filed a charge sheet against the remaining 18 accused persons.

The MLA followed up by filing the present petition before the High Court, a vacation bench of which on December 26 had granted him interim anticipatory bail till the final adjudication of the petition while noticing that he had appeared before the Bengaluru police for questioning, but CID had never called him for questioning even though there was no such bar from the court during the pendency of his petitions against the FIR and the invocation of KCOCA.