- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100099 OF 2025 [439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)] BETWEEN: BAGALI DEVENDRA S/O. LATE MANJAPPA, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC. LABOURER, R/O. KOGALI VILLAGE, TALUK: KOTTUR, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-587101. … PETITIONER (BY SRI SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, THROUGH ITTIGI POLICE STATION, TALUKA: HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-580011. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, SEEKING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN SC NO.5080/2024 (CRIME NO.59/2024 OF ITTIGI POLICE STATION) ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI (SITTING AT HOSPETE) REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103, 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352 AND 351(3) OF BNS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.02.28 16:29:45 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail in Crime no.59/2024 by Ittigi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103, 115 (2), 118 (1), 109, 352, 351 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (‘BNS’, for short) by sole accused (petitioner). 2. Sri Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for petitioner submits case of prosecution is that complaint was filed by Smt.Jogappanavar Rekha (complainant) stating that she married Siddappa about 11 years earlier and had four children and they were residing at Kogali village, Kotturu by doing agriculture. On 18.07.2024 at 7:30 p.m. her husband came home stating that he had pain in stomach area. On enquiry, he stated that at 6:30 p.m. when he was sitting with Agasara Raja near Parasappa Dhaba, Kogali, Devendra and Baslingappa from same village were quarreling over financial transaction, when Devendra pushed Baslingappa making him to fall down and he had intervened. At that time, Devendra had abused him and assaulted him by hitting him on his back. When victim caught hold of his hand, he picked up a stone and hit on his left - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 shoulder. At that time, others intervened and disbursed quarrel. Later, at 7:30 p.m. when he was near Varun Wine Shop in his village, Devendra assaulted him again with stone on his stomach causing internal injuries. Once again others came there and rescued him. Immediately, complainant informed her father-in-law and nephew and took him for treatment to Koppal District Hospital and got him admitted. Complainant further stated that after discussing at home, complaint was registered. 3. It was firstly submitted, though alleged incident occurred on 18.07.2024 at 6:30 p.m, and victim complained of stomach pain, he was admitted to hospital only on 19.07.2024. Further, when police officer went to hospital for recording statement of victim, he had refused to give statement twice, had said he would give complaint/statement only after his recovery. 4. It was submitted, victim died on 02.08.2024 and opinion as to cause of death in postmortem examination report was “death was due to sepsis secondary to blunt force impact to abdomen”, which showed that death was not as direct result of injury, but due to sepsis. Therefore, offence under Section 103 of BNS would not be tenable. It was submitted, other offences alleged were not punishable with death or - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 imprisonment for life and petitioner did not have any criminal antecedents and was a permanent resident of Kogali village, Kottur taluk holding movable and immovable properties. It was submitted, prosecution had completed investigation and filed charge sheet on 04.10.2024 while petitioner was in custody from date of his arrest i.e. on 27.07.2024 which would indicate that his presence would not be necessary for any further custodial interrogation. Hence, entitled petitioner for bail. On said ground sought for allowing petition. 5. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for respondent – State opposed petition. It was submitted, petitioner was charged with offences under Sections 103, 115 (2), 118 (1), 109, 352, 351 (3) of BNS. Offence of murder would attract capital punishment. Therefore, nature of offence was heinous. It was submitted, complaint was registered by wife within two days. It was submitted, statement of victim was recorded while he was in hospital, wherein he implicated petitioner. Besides, statements of CWs.10 to 13 who were eye- witnesses were recorded. It was further submitted, even cause of death mentioned in postmortem report would support prosecution case. Thus, there was sufficient material to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 establish prima facie case disentitling petitioner from bail. On above grounds, sought rejection of petition. 6. Heard learned counsel. 7. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for regular bail on conditions?” 8. This petition is for regular bail by sole accused in Crime no.59/2024 (supra). As stated indeed offence of murder under Section 103 of BNS would attract capital punishment. But other offences attract maximum punishment of imprisonment upto 2 years. Though it is contended on behalf of prosecution that there are eye-witnesses and statement of victim was also recorded prior to his death. But it is seen, complaint is by wife of deceased. Though admission of victim in hospital was as a MLC case, statement of CW.38 – Police Sub-Inspector who recorded statement of victim reveals that on 21.07.2024 when he went to hospital for recording statement, victim not only refused to give statement but also stated he would not file complaint until he recovered fully. Further seen opinion in postmortem report is that death was due to sepsis secondary to blunt force impact to abdomen. Moreover, injured was taken to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 hospital two days after injury and victim died during treatment twelve days after incident. 9. Under above circumstances, whether death was as directly due to injury inflicted by petitioner and whether petitioner is guilty of offences as alleged would be a matter for trial and it would not be possible to come at any definite conclusion based on available material at this stage. At same time, fact that prosecution had completed investigation while petitioner was in custody and filed charge sheet on 04.10.2024 would indicate that there would be no further requirement of petitioner for custodial interrogation. 10. For above reasons, point for consideration is answered in affirmative subject to conditions and with clarification that opinion expressed is for purposes of this order and would not bind trial Court while finally disposing of matter. Hence, following: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused is released on bail in Crime no.59/2024 by Ittigi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103, 115 (2), 118 (1), 109, 352, 351 (3) of BNS, subject to following conditions: - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3893 CRL.P No. 100099 of 2025 a) Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for likesum to satisfaction of Court. b) He shall not threaten or tamper with any prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. c) He shall not indulge in any criminal activities. d) He shall be regular in attending Court proceedings. e) He shall inform change in residence to Investigating Officer forthwith. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE CLK/GRD CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12