- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100807 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: KISHORI LAL KUSHWAHA S/O. ARJUN KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. FACTORY WORKER, R/O. BANAPURA VILLAGE, UPARAR POST, LIDHOR TALUKU, TIKAMGARH DISTRICT, MADHYA PRADESH STATE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI A. VEERANNA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, KUDUTINI, R/BY. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO GRANT A REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 FOR HIS RELEASE IN S.C. NO.78/2024, (CRIME NO.89/2024) KUDUTINI P.S. FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(1) OF THE BNS ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.29 12:04:17 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.A.Veeranna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Girija Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent. 2. Present petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C./483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer: “That the petitioner most respectfully prayed this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant a regular bail to the petitioner(Accused No.2) for his release in SC No.78/2024 (Crime No.89/2024 Kuduthini Police Station) for the offence punishable under Section 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(1) of the BNS Act, pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge Ballari, which would meet the ends of justice.” 3. Upon the complaint lodged by Gajaraja, a factory worker, Kuduthini Police registered a case in Crime number 89/2024 on 06.07.2024 for the offences punishable under section 103(1), 238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 4. Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that brother-in-law of the complaint by name Ramashankara Vishwakarma @ Bablu was working in Jindal Saw Limited Factory at Sulthanpur Taluk, Ballari District as carpenter through Ramaraja Enterprises. 5. On 05.07.2024 between the period from 3:00 p.m. onwards his brother-in-law was not found in the factory premises which has been intimated by Supervisor - Dharmendra at about 9:00 p.m. Search was kept to trace brother-in-law of the complaint but he was not found. 6. When the matter stood thus, on 06.07.2024 at about 11:00 a.m. Dharmendra telephoned to complainant and stated that dead body of brother-in-law of the complainant was found in the septic tank. A complaint came to be lodged with the jurisdictional Police. Thereafter, dead body was removed from the septic tank and inquest mahazar was conducted. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 7. Based on the complaint, police registered the case and investigated the matter inter alia arrested accused No.1 - Surendra. He gave a voluntary statement based on which iron rod which was used for killing the brother-in-law of the complainant was seized. Mobile telephone of the deceased was also seized from the septic tank. 8. Pursuant to the voluntary statement given by accused No.1, accused No.2 was also arrested on 13.07.2024. His voluntary statement was also recorded wherein he has shown the place of incident and also admitted that he has cleaned the blood stains by pouring the water and he has shown the place from which the water has been procured for cleaning the blood stains. 9. After necessary mahazars were conducted, collecting the necessary material on record including the CCTV footage, police filed the charge sheet against the present petitioner and accused No.1. Blood stained clothes were also seized from the custody of the accused and was - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and FSL report is also taken at time of filing the charge sheet. 10. Request made by the petitioner for grant of bail is turned down by the learned Trial Judge. 11. Thereafter, petitioner is before this Court in this revision petition. 12. Sri.A.Veeranna, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition contended that entire case of the prosecution insofar as present petitioner is concerned is based on the voluntary statement of accused No.1. As such, it is a week piece of evidence to establish the petitioner in the incident. 13. He would further contend that since the charge sheet is filed, continuation of the petitioner in the judicial custody is no longer warranted. 14. He also contends that case of the prosecution insofar as the present petitioner is concerned is only based - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 on suspicion and therefore, his request for grant of bail needs to be allowed. 15. Per contra, Smt.Girija Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the request for grant of bail. 16. She would further contend that CCTV footage has been seized under the mahazar which would prima facie depict that it is the present petitioner who took the deceased from the carpenter room to the place of incident as per the plan that has been hatched by accused Nos.1 and 2 and after reaching the place of incident, it is accused No.1 who hit the diseased with the iron rod on his head. 17. She would further contend that thereafter, on account of heavy bleeding, brother-in-law of the complainant died on the spot. Role of the present petitioner did not stop only in securing the presence of the deceased to the place of incident; but also in destruction of the evidence of crime which is specifically spelt out and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 necessary material evidence has been collected by the investigation agency. Therefore, bail request cannot be granted. 18. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 19. On such perusal of the material on record, presence of the present petitioner along with the diseased before his death and petitioner accompanying the deceased to the place of incident is prima facie profound from the CCTV footage. 20. Thereafter, what transpired and whether at all the present petitioner lent a helping hand to accused No.1 in committing the murder of brother-in-law of the complainant cannot be decided by this Court, at this stage, by holding a mini trial. 21. Suffice to say that the material evidence collected by the prosecution at this stage, would definitely disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail by resorting to the special powers vested in this Court - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 under Section 483 by Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 22. Recovery of blood stained clothes under the panchanama, arrest of the petitioner on 13.07.2024 for the incident that occurred on 05.07.2024 after the arrest of accused No.1 on 06.07.2024, are all the factors that would necessarily be adjudicated in the trial. 23. Since there are no eyewitnesses to the incident, the technical evidence will have to be proved by the prosecution by examining the mahazar witnesses who are part of the seizure of the CCTV footage. 24. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, the apprehensions expressed by the prosecution is well found at least at this stage, till the material witnesses are examined on behalf of the prosecution. 25. Under such circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the grounds urged in the bail petition are hardly sufficient to entertain the request of the petitioner. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5052 CRL.P No. 100807 of 2025 26. Hence, the following: ORDER Bail grounds are meritless and hereby rejected. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16