In February 2015, a Class 8 student went missing in Bengaluru. While his parents and the police searched for him, it was discovered six days later that he had been killed. In the quest to find his son’s killer, the father even took on the role of a “detective”. What was even more chilling was that the boy had affectionately referred to his murderer as “Anna”.
The murder of the 14-year-old boy at the Bangalore University campus sent shock waves across the city. It was revealed that advice from the student’s mother to the accused was the motive. Though the accused was convicted, the boy’s family later relocated from Bengaluru.
Student goes missing
On the evening of February 4, 2015, Kiran Yadav, the son of BM Ravi Kumar and Pramila, residents of Chandra Layout, did not return from He Sri Chaitanya Techno School in Mallathahalli. Typically, he would take the school bus, get off near Vishwa Bharathi School, and walk the rest of the way home.
Ravi reached out to the school, and the school bus driver confirmed that Kiran got off at the usual location. Ravi approached the Chandra Layout police and filed a missing persons complaint. On February 10, 2015, the body of a young student in uniform was discovered in the Bangalore University forest area.
The police asked Ravi to come in and identify his son. Upon arriving, Ravi was horrified to discover that his son’s throat had been slit. “There was no one to suspect, as Ravi did not have any enemies who would want to harm his son. We examined the backgrounds of Ravi and his wife, but nothing significant emerged,” said a police officer from the Chandra Layout police station.
When the father went in search of the suspect
While the police were in search of the accused, there were no leads in the case. “The investigations from the police were not up to the mark. They were busy with a lot of other cases. But my son was killed, and I thought any delay would affect finding the culprit,” Ravi said in 2017.
Ravi visited the area near Vishwa Bharathi School to check for installed CCTV cameras. He meticulously reviewed the footage from each shop and house. “It took me six days to go through the visuals from 50 to 75 CCTV cameras,” Ravi explained.
Story continues below this ad
CCTV footage showed that Kiran was riding a motorcycle when he returned. Upon reviewing additional camera footage, Ravi discovered that Kiran had gotten onto one Manjunath’s motorcycle. Manjunath, then 22, was the son of a landlord who lived next door to Ravi’s family.
To confirm his suspicions, Ravi gathered a series of video recordings from the areas where Manjunath and Kiran had travelled together on a two-wheeler. “I then handed all the footage over to the police and informed them about my concerns regarding Manjunath’s potential involvement,” said Ravi.
One reason Manjunath was not on the suspects list was that, after the murder, he remained in the area, attended Kiran’s funeral, and feigned a strong sense of grief over the loss of a boy who often referred to her as ‘Anna’ (elder sister). They also played cricket together. The boy sometimes ate at Manjunath’s house when running late for school.
How an advice turned fatal
With digital evidence in hand, the police arrested Manjunath on February 11, 2015, and produced him before a court. During the probe, it was revealed that as Kiran stepped off the school van, Manjunath was waiting. He spun a convincing lie: “Your brother fell and got hurt. Your family has taken him to the hospital. Come with me quickly.”
Story continues below this ad
The boy climbed onto Manjunath’s black bike without hesitation. CCTV footage from Sri Lekha Enterprises would later capture them at 6:07 p.m., riding from Moodalapalya toward Nagarabhavi Circle—Kiran still wearing his school uniform, with the bag visible on his back. What the cameras did not capture was the route to Jnana Bharathi University Campus, which also passes through thick forest and dense bushes.
While the postmortem suggested that Kiran’s throat was slit, the police then started building evidence where they found out a store from which Manjunath had bought five shaving blades. He had taken Kiran Yadav 200-300 metres inside dense vegetation from the main road to kill him.
Speaking about the motive, a police officer said, “In December 2014, Kiran’s mother Pramila had complained to Manjunath’s mother about his character, particularly regarding someone named Ashwini.”
Ashwini was the wife of a car driver who was a tenant in Manjunath’s property. Ashwini was having an affair with Manjunath, which Pramila had noticed. She had informed Manjunath’s mother and advised her to stay away, as it would put him in deep trouble. The police mentioned the same in the chargesheet, which the court accepted.
Story continues below this ad
Trial
Shortly after Manjunath’s arrest, his family claimed that he was being framed because he had raised concerns about Ravi and his wife cheating in a chit fund scheme. Harish Govindappa Varad, the public prosecutor representing the victim’s family, stated, “The family initially alleged that Manjunath was being falsely implicated because the couple had not returned the chit money, which was untrue.”
Following the charges against Manjunath by the Chandra Layout police, the trial began on January 5, 2016. Varad remembers this case as one of the classic cases where the scientific evidence was more emphasised.
“The prosecution presented 26 witnesses and 38 documents. The CCTV footage, Manjunath’s voluntary confession, recovery of the body and murder weapon, and forensic evidence. Most of the witnesses turned hostile, but the medical evidence spoke for the crime,” he said.
The police made Manjunath undergo medical tests on February 12, 2015, a day after his arrest. “Manjunath, who had used a blade to slit the throat, had sustained injuries in the act as the boy had protested. Also, there was a bruise mark near his elbow. It matched the evidence collected at the crime scene. Besides that, the doctors who conducted the post-mortem and medical examination of the accused deposed their statements, which played a crucial role,” Varad said.
Story continues below this ad
Conviction
On December 18, 2017, the 50th additional city civil and sessions court convicted Manjunath for life imprisonment. Judge Susheela in the order said, “The oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution is sufficient to prove the alleged offences against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The defence of the accused was not established by him through cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses. The facts and circumstances of the case, including materials on record discussed above, probably favour the case of the prosecution rather than the defence of the accused.”
Varad said that the family faced troubles after Manjunath was arrested. “Ravi, who is a native of Gangavathi, Koppal district, was facing threats, and through the court, we got him police protection for his family. The family also relocated to Gangavathi after the incident and never shifted to Bengaluru. They faced huge trauma, but the father stood strong to get justice,” Varad said.