- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200090 OF 2025 (U/S 14 (A)(2)) BETWEEN: VARUNKUMAR S/O RAJKUMAR YUVANI, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: AUTODRIVE, R/O. NEAR NAGANHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI CITY. …APPELLANT (BY SRI BASAVALING NASI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE THROUGH UNIVERSITY PS, KALABURAGI, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT KALABURAGI BENCH-585102. 2. SMT. SHOBHA W/O NAGENDRA MALLABADI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NAGANHALLI VILLAGE, N/A AIROLI THANE, NAVI MUMBAI, NOW RESIDING NAGANHALLI VILLAGE, KALABURAGI CITY, KALABURAGI-585103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA YADAV, HCGP FOR R1; SRI CHAITANYAKUMAR C.M., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14(A) (2) OF SC/ST ACT, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03-03-2025 PASSED Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 IN SPL.SC/ST NO. 94/2024 BY THE II-ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE KALABURAGI CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAME ON BAIL IN BEARING CRIME NO.229/2024 OF UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 190, OF BNS AND U/S 3(1)(r)(s) AND 3(2)(v) OF SC AND ST ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF II-ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KALABURAGI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused No.1 seeking to set aside the order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Special Case (SC/ST) No.94/2024 by II-Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Kalaburagi, and to enlarge the appellant on regular bail in Crime No.229/2024 registered by University Police Station, Kalaburagi, for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 109, 103(1) r/w Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant, who is the mother of the deceased-Sumit had lodged a complaint stating that she is the mother of three sons namely, Sushil, Sachin and Sumit. She was living at Mumbai along with her children and her husband. However, her son namely Sachin was living with her sister-in-law namely, Siddamma at Naganhalli, Kalaburagi. Eight to ten days prior to the incident, she had come to Kamalapur to attend the funeral ceremony of her father. After attending the funeral ceremony, on 19.09.2024, she had come to Naganhalli to meet her son. There, she learnt that her son Sachin was quarreling with accused No.1 on the pretext that he was loving the sister of accused No.1. On 20.09.2024 at about 7:00 p.m., the appellant along with 5 to 6 persons came to the house of her sister-in-law namely, Siddamma and asked about Sachin. AS they could not trace the Sachin, they assaulted Sumit and instructed him to inform them if Sachin comes to the house. On the same day, at about 8.30 p.m., all the accused persons with a common intention to commit the offences - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 came in the auto and asked the complainant as to whether the said Sachin had come to the house or not. When the accused did not get satisfactory answer, they were started assaulting the complainant. Sumit being a son of the complainant, tried to interfere in the said quarrel, however, accused No.1 instructed accused No.2 to bring the knife which was kept in the auto. Accused No.2 brought the knife and handed over the said knife to accused No.1, he took the knife and stabbed the said Sumit. Consequently, Sumit sustained injuries and succumbed to the said injuries. Based on the complaint, the respondent – police registered a case, conducted investigation and submitted the charge sheet. 3. Heard Sri.Basavaling Nasi, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Gopal Krishna Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri.Chaitanyakumar Chandriki, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is arrayed as accused No.1. He had no intention to commit the murder. However, due to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 sudden provocation, the incident had occurred. Hence, the appellant may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. 5. It is further submitted that the appellant was working as an auto driver for his livelihood and he is a resident of Naganhalli and he is the only earning member in the family and he has to take care of his entire family. The appellant is ready to abide the conditions that may be imposed by this Court in the event of releasing him on bail. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the appeal. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that accused No.1, who is the appellant herein had assaulted the son of the complainant in her presence, as a result of which, her son died in the hospital. There are three eyewitnesses to the incident. If the appellant is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the bail application of the appellant may be dismissed. Making such submissions, he prays to dismiss the appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2303 CRL.A No. 200090 of 2025 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the records that the appellant being the brother of Usha had nurtured the grudge against the Sachin, who was said to be love his sister. 8. It is stated in the complaint that the appellant herein had assaulted the deceased Sumit with a knife. Consequently, the deceased died in the hospital. Having considered the overt-act attributed against the appellant, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER The Criminal Appeal is rejected. The appellant is at liberty to review the bail application before this Court after examination of the eyewitnesses. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13/CT:PK