‘Kumbh Mela trip’ evidence proves crucial: Karnataka HC rejects BJP MLA Byrathi Basavaraj’s anticipatory bail plea in Bengaluru real estate murder case

“The interrogation of powerful accused, such as the petitioner, who is highly influential armed with an order of anticipatory bail may not be as effective. The decision as to the manner of investigation must be left with the Investigation Authority and the Court cannot sit in judgment over the same,” the HC said in its order.

The HC has referred to evidence cited by the Special Public Prosecutor B N Jagadeesh, on behalf of the CID unit of the Karnataka police, including analysis of mobile phone location, call detail records and allegations of threats to witnesses like the mother of the victim to reject the plea of the MLA.

The court has observed that “the grant of anticipatory bail is an extraordinary relief”.

“The perusal of the investigation material placed before the Court prima facie does reveal that there are substantial records which may be required to be confronted to the accused as a part of the investigation,” the HC said.

“Such material consists of CDRs,reports of enquiry on the complaint of the deceased and photographs of the petitioner along with the accused. No doubt, such evidence is a matter to be subjected to further scrutiny, however, the request of the respondent State for custodial interrogation cannot be brushed aside,” the HC noted..

During the arguments of the case the CID had argued that the BJP MLA had lied to the Bengaluru police during interrogation in July 2025, soon after the murder, that he did know key accused persons in the murder case at all and that the investigations including call details, mobile location data and pictures on social media had revealed a close association including a joint trip to Prayagraj for the Kumbh Mela in February 2025.

The HC said it had perused the investigation records, including “the CDRs as well as photograph” and that “the CDRs contain information which the petitioner is required to explain.” “There is sufficient force in the assertion of the Prosecution based on the investigation records, that the petitioner has much to explain,” the HC observed.

“Prima facie, such material would indicate that the petitioner cannot merely wash his hands off as if he is a stranger and has no relationship to the incident or the deceased,” the HC said.

A total of 19 of 20 accused persons have been arrested so far over the July 15, 2025 murder of the real estate operator Bikla Shiva who also had a criminal record of interfering in property disputes by creating fake claims.

The CID had invoked the stringent Karnataka Control of Organized Crime Act, 2002 (KCOCA) in the murder case on August 12, 2025 but the Karnataka HC quashed the invoking of KCOCA on December 16, 2025 by saying no accused in the case was also involved in other recent crimes with punishment of a jail terms of three years.

The CID has challenged the order in the Supreme Court saying the Karnataka HC had erred in its interpretation of the KCOCA. The SC has not stayed the judgment but has indicated that the order will not be a precedent that can be cited in other organized crime cases.

During the recent arguments on the anticipatory bail plea by Byrathi Basavaraj in the HC the CID produced an analysis of mobile Call Detail Records for the MLA to prove his association with members of the gang that is accused of executing the July 15, 2025 Bikla Shiva murder.

The CDR analysis for the BJP MLA was cited to show his association with key members of the gang – including accused number one Jagadish alias Jaga, a former Bengaluru rowdy sheeter, accused number 2, Kiran K, and accused number 20, Ajith Kumar, who are among the 19 arrested accused in the murder case.

The SPP presented the CDR analysis to tell the high court that the call data and tower location information gathered by the police in the course of investigations had revealed a close association between the MLA and the accused persons – prior to the murder and even during the plotting of the alleged murder – with the MLA traveling to Prayagraj for the Kumbh Mela between February 10 to 12, 2025 on the same flight with the same tickets as the key accused.

The CDR analysis of the mobile number of the MLA along with the geo mapping of the phone of the key accused Jagadish, Kiran and Ajith reveals that they were all in the same location with the MLA at the same time or moving together on many occasions, the court was told.

The data from cell phones showed that the accused were with the MLA for the Kumbh Mela in Prayagraj between February 10 and 12 and tower location data reveals that phone calls were made to associates in Bengaluru over the real estate dispute with the murder victim for 13 guntas of land in survey number 212 of Kithaganur village in Bengaluru, the SPP said.

The cell phones of all the key accused were switched off after the murder of the realtor V G Shivaprakash alias Bikla Shiva on a public street in east Bengaluru on the evening of July 15, 2025, and some of the key accused like Jagadish left the city and country, the SPP said.

The call detail records and geo mapping evidence was produced in the HC “to demonstrate that the petitioner has tried to mislead the investigation” and that he “tried to distance himself from the accused but the records reveal something else” the SPP told the HC. ”

The SPP also claimed that the mother of the victim who had named the MLA as an accused was threatened into retracting her statement but had testified in court about her son receiving threats from the MLA and associates over interference in property deals.

The SPP also argued that the local police were hand in glove with the BJP MLA and this had led to the failure of the police to register an FIR following two complaints filed by the victim in February and March of 2025 of threats to his life and even an attempt to murder.

“We want interrogation (of the MLA) in custody because he is not an ordinary person,” the SPP told the high court while seeking dismissal of the anticipatory bail plea.