- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104202 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. LALITHA SINGH S/O. BHARATH SINGH PRAY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS OCC: LORRY DRIVER R/O. NEAR DURGAMATHA TEMPLE DIKTOLI VILLAGE SIKOHABAD TALUK FIROZABAD DISTRICT UTTAR PRADESH STATE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN P TARIKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH NARGUND POLICE STATION BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 DHARWAD - 01. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, ADVOCATE) *** THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.73/2025 2023 REGISTERED BY NARAGUND POLICE STATION FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 109, 103(1), 238 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA 2023, IN S.C.NO.70/2025 ON THE FILE BEFORE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE GADAG AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.73/2025 of respondent- police for the offences under Sections 106(1), 125(b) and 281 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS 2023’) and Sections 134 and 187 of Indian Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 06.04.2025, around 12.30 in the midnight, the driver of the lorry bearing its registration No.TS-15/UE-8860 came to the dhaba to have dinner. The accused was upset/angry with the owner of the dhaba as he had not given food at the earliest. Further, it is stated that the accused had assaulted the owner of the dhaba. In the meantime, the deceased Shivanand and his friend Saddam S/o Murathusaba had asked the accused as to why he was assaulting the owner of the dhaba. A quarrel has ensued between the accused and his friend. It is stated that the deceased and his friend had - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 assaulted the accused. The petitioner being enraged by the act of the deceased and his friend, on 06.04.2025, with the intention to commit the murder of the deceased and his friend, he was waiting near the dhaba in his lorry. The deceased Shivanna and his friend, after having their dinner started the bullet bike to go to the house. The accused after seeing that the deceased and his friend were proceeding towards Bagalkot, followed them and dashed the motorcycle near Byranahatti Village, Naragund Taluk. Further, it is stated that the motorcycle was dragged nearly 100 metres after the accident. Consequently, the rider of the motorcycle, namely, Shivanand, died on the spot. CW.8 – Saddam had sustained grievous injuries. Based on the compliant, FIR came to be registered against the accused for the offences stated supra. After conducting the investigation, submitted the charge sheet. 3. Heard Sri.Praveen P.Tarikar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Praveen Y.Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in the case. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. 5. It is further submitted that C.W.8, who is stated to be the pillion rider of the motorcycle, had not identified the driver of the vehicle. In fact, the lorry sustained no damages to substantiate the claim that it collided with the motorcycle. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State vehemently submitted that the averments of the charge sheet would indicate that C.W.8 is the eyewitness to the incident. He had accompanied the deceased Shivanand to have food in a dhaba and he had witnessed the incident of the accident. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 C.W.9 and C.W.10 are the witnesses and they have seen the quarrel that had taken place in the dhaba. The prosecution has proved the case that the accused had a motive to commit the murder of the injured and also the rider of the motorcycle. Consequently, he had dashed to the said motorcycle and caused injuries to the rider and pillion rider. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Moreover, he is a resident of Uttar Pradesh. If he is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of absconding from the case. Hence, the petition has to be rejected. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. On perusal of the averments of the charge sheet, it would indicate that the petitioner had been to the dhaba, which was being run by C.W.9 and C.W.10. The petitioner is stated to have quarreled with the owner of the dhaba for not supplying the food on time. It is further stated that he had assaulted the owner of the dhaba. In the meantime, the deceased Shivanand and C.W.8 came to the dhaba and asked the accused as to why he had assaulted the owner of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18060 CRL.P No. 104202 of 2025 the dhaba. A quarrel was ensued between the accused and the petitioner, the petitioner is stated to have been assaulted. As per the version of C.W.8, the accused with the intention to commit murder, dashed the motorcycle of which the deceased was riding and caused injuries. Consequently, the rider of the motorcycle died and the pillion rider had sustained injuries. The pillion rider, being a witness to the incident, has stated before the police that he identified the driver and also the lorry which caused the accident. Such being the fact, it is not appropriate to grant bail. 8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE UN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9