- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100276 OF 2025 [439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)] BETWEEN: 1. MARIYAPPA S/O. HULAGAPPA BISTI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 2. HULLESH S/O. MARIYAPPA BISTI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 3. CHENNAPPA S/O. HUSENAPPA NARINALA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 4. MANJUNATH S/O. DURGAPPA BISTI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 5. VEERESHA S/O. MARIYAPPA BISTI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 6. HUSHENAPPA S/O. SHAMANNA BISTI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 7. VEERESHA S/O. HANAMANTHAPPA BISTI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.02.07 14:20:33 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 8. PAMANNA S/O. HULAGAPPA BISTI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, ALL ARE R/O. HARIJANA WARD, TAWARAGERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583279. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI ARAVIND D. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH TAVARAGERA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580011. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 483 OF BNSS, SEEKING TO GRANT OF REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 AND 12 IN CRIME NO.152/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2) (3), 351(2), 352 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, (BNS) 2023, ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KOPPAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 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 (‘BNSS’ for short) for grant of regular bail in Crime no.152/2024 by Tavaregera Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (‘BNS’ for short) by accused no.1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 (petitioners). 2. Sri Aravind D. Kulkarni, learned counsel for petitioners submitted case of prosecution was that a complaint was filed by Pramoda Durgesh Narinala at 10:45 p.m., on 06.12.2024 stating that at 9:15 p.m., on same day when complainant along with neighbours Ravi Narinala, Chandrappa and Hanumantha were sitting in Thayamma temple, accused came in a group armed with deadly weapons, abused complainant and her friends in filthy language and Hullesh Bisti assaulted Pramoda with chopper on backside of her neck, Mariyappa Basti assaulted Ravi Narinala with chopper, Basavaraj Bisti assaulted Channappa Narinala with chopper and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 club on his head and left hand, Holiyappa Chalageri assaulted Chandrappa Narinala on his head with axe, Manjunatha Bisti assaulted Hanumantha Narinala with rod on his left forearm, Veeresh Bisti, Hussainappa Bisti and Mariyamma Bisti assaulted complainant and Ravi Narinala with clubs while Veeresh, Laxmi Bisti and Pamanna Bisti were pelting stones. In meanwhile, Manjunath, Veeresh and Ganesh came to spot and pacified matter. Thereafter, accused left by threatening complainant and others on their life. It was further stated that due to injuries sustained, complainant and others were shifted to Tavaregera Government Hospital. In view of MLC intimation, their statements were recorded and complaint in Crime no.152/2024 was registered for offences as stated above. 3. It was submitted, as per complainant, incident occurred on 06.12.2024 at 9:15 p.m. But, it was case of political rivalry between two groups and petitioners were falsely implicated. It was submitted, present accused no.9 had filed complaint registered as Crime no.153/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 74, 109, 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2)(3), 324(4), 329(4), 351(2) and 352 of BNS against 14 persons including complainant herein. It was - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 submitted, incident mentioned therein was prior, namely on 06.12.2024 at 7:30 p.m., in evening when complainant was alone with children, knowing absence of menfolk, accused no.1 – Durgesh Narinal along with accused no.2 to 14 formed an unlawful assembly, came there and began abusing complainant’s husband in filthy language and expressing intention to murder him. 4. With that intention, they had carried chopper, axe, rod and clubs and assaulted complainant asking her to reveal location of her husband and threatening to molest her, in case she did not give proper information. Accused no.1 also pulled her saree and attempted to rape her. She was also assaulted with deadly weapons. Even children who were sleeping were not spared and assaulted with deadly weapons, inflicting grievous injuries. That apart, they damaged household articles such as television, motorcycle, etc. Hearing her cries for help, well-wishers and neighbours came there and saved complainant and her children. As they were taking private treatment at home and met community elders, there was some delay in filing complaint. Complaint was filed at 10:00 a.m., on 08.12.2024 and registered as Crime no.153/2024. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 5. It was submitted, fact that failure to support in election was assigned as a motive for assault was too far fetched as elections were held more than three years earlier and in which, Accused no.9 had won. Therefore, this indicated that complaint was filed for political vendetta and to tarnish image of petitioners. It was further submitted, normally in case of an assault by large group of 12 persons, it would not be possible for complainant to notice and recollect names of each of assailant, weapon used and injury inflicted with such details as stated in complaint. Same raised serious doubts. It was further submitted, though complaint was filed by present accused no.9 for similar or more severe offences, there was no progress in investigation and no arrest was made. Whereas in present case, petitioners were arrested immediately. It was submitted, petitioners were all permanent residents of Tavaregera. Therefore, possibility of either jumping bail or tampering with prosecution witnesses or investigation would not be substantiated. On above grounds, sought for grant of bail. 6. Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP on other hand sought to oppose petition. It was firstly submitted, - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 offences alleged against petitioners were severe and grave. Injuries found on complainant and victims were grievous in nature as per medical records obtained. Complaint filed by present accused no.9 was subsequent and investigation was being undertaken on that complaint also. It was submitted, since investigation was not yet completed and as complainant’s family and petitioners were from same village, in case of release of petitioners on bail, there was likelihood it affecting proper investigation. It was further submitted, both complainant as well as accused had criminal antecedents. On above grounds, sought for dismissal of petition. 7. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record. 8. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioners are entitled for regular bail with conditions?” 9. This petition is for regular bail for offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 352 of BNS by accused no.1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12. Nature of offences alleged against - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 petitioners are attempt to murder, forming of unlawful assembly, rioting, causing grievous hurt, causing hurt with weapons, breach of peace, criminal intimidation, etc. Most serious offence among them would be attempt to murder carrying maximum sentence of imprisonment for upto 10 years. Therefore, offences alleged do appear to be serious and grave. 10. However, this appears to be case of complaint and counter complaint due to political rivalry between two groups. Criminal antecedents of both groups are infact taken note of by learned District Judge while passing orders on petitioners’ bail petitions. Thus there possibility of complaint being filed for political reasons. Further fact that petitioners herein were arrested a day after complaint was registered against them apparently even before obtaining copies of Wound Certificates whereas, absolutely no arrests are made on complaint filed by present accused no.9, even though complaint averments disclose similar if not more severe offences being committed by present complainant and others. 11. Though investigation is stated to be pending, on both complaints, taking note of fact that virtually all male - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 members of one group and are arrested even in a case involving complaint and counter complaint. Besides concerns of prosecution can be mitigated by imposing appropriate conditions. Thus, above point for consideration is answered in affirmative and petitioners would be entitled for bail with conditions. Hence, following: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioners/accused no.1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 are released on bail in Crime no.152/2024 of Tavaregera Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, subject to following conditions: a) Each petitioner i.e.,accused no.1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 shall execute personal bonds in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for likesum. b) They shall appear before Investigating Officer as and when required and co-operate with investigation. c) They shall not threaten, tamper with or influence prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2127 CRL.P No. 100276 of 2025 d) Till filing of charge-sheet they shall mark their attendance every alternate Sunday between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., before Investigating Officer. e) They shall be regular in attending Court proceedings. f) It is clarified that views expressed are prima facie and shall not influence final outcome after trial. sd SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE RH CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12