- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100492 OF 2025 [439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)] BETWEEN: SHASHIDHAR S/O. GURUSIDDAPPA CHANNOJI, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. NANDAGAON VILLAGE, TAL. ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001. … PETITIONER (BY SRI V.M.SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY P.S.I HUBBALLI RURAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE AND SECTION 482 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSE NO.1 ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.5069/2024 (HUBBALLI RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.177/2024), PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED V ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 120B, READ WITH 34 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.02.24 17:07:25 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 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.117/2024 of Hubli Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 302, 34 and 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short) by accused no.1 (petitioner). 2. Sri VM Sheelvant, learned counsel for petitioner submitted as per prosecution case, a complaint was filed by Moulasab on 13.05.2024 at 1:00 p.m. stating that his parents were originally from Harishinageri village of Mundgod taluk, but were residing in Halyal village of Hubballi taluk since 40 years. Complainant and his elder brother Sharifsab were married and were residing separately in same village. And on 12.05.2024, he received information at 10:00 p.m. about his brother found injured in school. He went there and saw Sharifsab lying dead in pool of blood with injuries on his head, face and limbs. It was stated that at 9:30 p.m. victim and Shashidhar (accused no.1) went to Egg-rice shop of Dhawalsab (CW.17) and ordered - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 parcel and went into school but not found later. Therefore, he suspected accused no.1 had murdered victim with flooring stone or some other weapon. Said complaint was registered as Crime no.117/2024 and petitioner arrested on 13.05.2024 and his statement was recorded. Thereafter charge sheet was filed on 26.07.2024. 3. It was submitted in FIR, complainant had falsely implicated petitioner without sufficient basis or eye-witnesses to incident. It was submitted though prosecution intended to rely on two circumstances, firstly, last seen theory, based on statement of CW.14 that victim and petitioner came to his shop, ordered parcel and went into school and thereafter victim was found dead. But, in statement recorded under Section 164, CW.14 mentioned only about deceased coming to his shop for parcel, therefore petitioner’s implication was without any basis. Even statement of CW.16 was about seeing petitioner and accused no.2 running on tank bund stating that they had quarreled with victim. But by that time he had already heard about murder, which was contrary to his statement. It was submitted, entire prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confession. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 4. It was submitted postmortem report would show, cause of death as due to asphyxia as a result of compression of neck. It was submitted, above material would not in any manner implicate petitioner or directly incriminate against him. Thus, only basis for arraigning petitioner was alleged recovery of bloodstained clothes, FSL report and confessional statement of petitioner. It was submitted, whether clothes stained with blood of victim would be matter for trial. And Hon’ble Supreme Court had time and again stated confessional statements as unreliable. It was thus submitted since charge sheet was already filed and matter was pending at stage of hearing before charge, conclusion of trial was likely to be delayed. As petitioner was in custody from 13.05.2024, he was entitled for bail on conditions. 5. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP opposed petition. It was submitted offences alleged against accused conspiracy to murder and murder, which were heinous and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It was submitted there were specific overt-acts against petitioner and in course of investigation, Investigating Officer had recorded statements of several persons including CW.14 about last seen - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 and CW.16 who had heard petitioner and accused no.2 stating about quarrel with victim, while they were running away. It was submitted that confession by accused had also lead to recovery of bloodstained clothes. Thus, there was sufficient material to support charges and as nature of offences were heinous and prosecution witnesses were from same village, there would be every chance of petitioner tampering prosecution witnesses, in case of grant of bail. As such sought rejection of bail petition. 6. Heard learned counsel. 7. From above, only point that would arise is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for regular bail with conditions?” 8. This petition is for regular bail by petitioner - accused no.1 for offences mentioned above. Petitioner is charged with conspiring with common intention of murdering victim. Though offence of murder would be heinous in nature, specific overt-acts insofar as petitioner were, he picked up flooring stone and threw it on victim’s head and later strangulated him with his foot over victim’s neck. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 9. Prosecution relies on statement of CW.17 about motive for murder that, victim had stolen clothes from shop belonging to CW.17 and when accused demanded payment for same, victim retorted, leading to quarrel and later to murder. While CW-17 is relative of petitioner, there does not appear any relationship between accused no.2 and CW.17. 10. Prima facie prosecution appears to be relying upon two circumstances, last seen theory based on statement of CW.14, who in his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC, did not mention of any one. It would appear, prosecution was relying on confession of petitioner before Investigating Officer. Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Ratnu Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1667 and Randeep Singh @ Rana and Anr. v. State of Haryana, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3383, explained circumstances under which extra judicial confessions could be relied upon stating that they would weak form of evidence. Though FSL report would indicate clothes of petitioner as stained with blood, whether same were stained with blood of victim as a result of incident in question would require to be established during trial. Since investigation is completed and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 charge sheet filed, it would appear there would be no further need for custodial interrogation of petitioner and concerns of prosecution about interference or influencing of prosecution witnesses etc. could be addressed by imposing certain conditions. Consequently, point for consideration is answered in the affirmative. Hence following: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner - accused No.1 is released on regular bail in Crime no.117/2024 of Hubli Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 302, 34 and 120B of IPC, subject to following conditions: a) Petitioner - accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for 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 involve in any criminal activities. d) He shall be regular in attending Court proceedings. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3684 CRL.P No. 100492 of 2025 e) He shall forthwith inform any change of his residence to Investigating Officer. f) It is clarified that views expressed are prima facie and shall not influence final outcome after trial. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE CLK CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 24