- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 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.100850 OF 2025 [439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)] C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103865 OF 2024 [439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)] IN CRL.P.NO.100850/2025: BETWEEN: 1. PRAVEEN IRAPPA KUBIYAL AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, R/O. NEAR HANUMANT DEVAR GUDI, ITIGATTI, DHARWAD-580011. 2. SAHADEV HANAMANTAPPA NOOLVI AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, R/O. PUJAR ONI, ITAGATTI, DHARWAD-580011. (BOTH ARE IN JC SINCE 09.04.2024) … PETITIONERS (BY SRI R.M. JAVED, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HUBBALLI RURAL P.S., REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.02.28 16:30:19 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 AND 3 ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH HUBBALLI RURAL P.S. CRIME NO. 84/2024 (NOW SC NO. 5054/2024) REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI. IN CRL.P.NO.103865/2024: BETWEEN: HANUMANT S/O. DYAMANNA MALAGIMANI, AGE: 25 YEARS. OCCUPATION: COOLIE, R/O. NEAR HANUMANTH DEVAR GUDDI, ITIGATTI, TQ. AND DISTRICT: DHARWAD, PIN-580114. … PETITIONER (BY SRI T.R. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HUBBALLI RURAL P.S., REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD, PIN-580011. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ON BAIL, IN S.C. NO.5054/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HUBBALLI ARISING OUT OF HUBBALLI RURAL P.S. CRIME NO.84/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302 READ WITH UNDER SECTION 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) These petitions are filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail in Crime no.84/2024 by Hubballi Rural Police Station, for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short). While Crl.P.no.100850/2025 is filed by accused no.1 and 3, Crl.P.no.103865/2024 is filed by accused no.2. 2. Prosecution case against petitioners was that Smt.Renuka Hadapad (complainant) filed complaint on 08.04.2024 stating that she was working in Sai Garments factory and residing with her husband Shanmukhappa (victim) and two children at Vajpaye Nagar, Tarihal. She stated that victim was working as Helper in Pilcon Systems Co. had begun consuming alcohol affecting his health. He also took treatment in ESI Hospital. On 06.04.2024, after she returned from work, when victim came home drunk, she scolded him, which led to quarrel between them. Next day, he had left home early and she saw him sitting near Lotus Bar, while going to work. After returning, she noticed that he had not come home. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 3. While she was expecting him to return later, at 11:30 a.m., her daughter called her at work and told her that someone inform her about victim lying dead in garden land near Lotus Bar, Tarihal. On reaching, she found victim lying dead with blood clot injuries on head, face and hands etc., with broken beer bottles lying nearby. Suspecting that someone had murdered victim between 5:00 p.m. on 07.04.2024 and 11:30 a.m. on 08.04.2024, complaint was filed. Same was registered as Crime no.84/2024 by Hubballi Rural Police for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. It was submitted, petitioners were arrested on 09.04.2024 and after completion of investigation, filed charge-sheet on 26.06.2024 for offences under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC. 4. Sri RM Javed and Sri TR Patil, learned counsel for petitioners submitted complaint was filed against unknown persons. Admittedly, there were no eye-witnesses. Petitioners were subsequently arraigned without sufficient basis, based on circumstantial evidence statements of CW-11 - employee of Lotus Bar and CW-13 Egg-rice shop owner, who stated about petitioners purchasing liquor and egg rice and going into Garden. Further, recovery of beer bottles, with which victim was alleged to have been murdered was not at instance of any - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 of petitioners. Apart from above, there were no criminal antecedents. Besides, they were permanent residents of Ittigatti. Thus, as charge-sheet was filed and prosecution was intending to examine 29 witnesses, conclusion of trial was likely to be delayed. Therefore, submitted petitioners were entitled for bail. 5. On other hand, Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP for respondent - State opposed petition. It was submitted, petitioners were accused of committing murder attracting capital punishment. Therefore, nature of offences were heinous. In view of allegation that petitioners had committed offences with common intention, contention that there were no specific overt acts in respect of each of petitioners would not hold good. It was submitted, there was recovery of broken pieces of beer bottle along with wallet of accused no.1 at spot, at his instance. Opinion as to cause of death mention in post mortem report that death was as a result of hemorrhage caused due to injuries sustained with blunt object, would also corroborate prosecution case. Thus, there was more than prima facie case against petitioners. It was further submitted, in case petitioners are enlarged on bail, they - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 were likely to tamper prosecution witnesses and subvert trial. On above ground sought for dismissal of petitions. 6. Heard learned counsel. 7. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioners are entitled for regular bail on conditions?” 8. This petition is for regular bail by accused no.1 to 3 in Crime no.84/2024 by Hubballi Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. Since offence of murder is punishable with death or imprisonment for life, nature of offence alleged against petitioners is heinous. 9. Admittedly, there are no eye-witnesses and entire case of prosecution is circumstantial, dependant on statements of CW-11 and CW-13. CW-11 is employee of Lotus Bar, who stated that victim purchased liquor at 8:30 p.m. and went into mango garden and petitioners purchased beer bottle and alcohol in tetra pack went into mango garden at 9:00 p.m. Likewise CW-13, egg rice shop owner stated victim purchased water bottle, boiled egg and went into garden at 8:30 p.m. followed by petitioners who purchased water bottle and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3898 CRL.P No. 100850 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 103865 of 2024 cigarettes and went into garden at 9:00 p.m. Indeed, both stated to have heard galata sound, with CW-11 mentioning it to be around 10:00 p.m. Though, where prosecution case is dependent purely on circumstantial evidence, accused would have stronger claim for bail, in instant case, in statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC, there is confession about committing murder, coupled with recovery of blood stained cloths at their instance and FSL report opining stains to be of human blood would indicate existence of prima facie case and whether petitioners have in fact committed offences as alleged would be a matter for trial. It would neither be appropriate nor desirable for this Court to come to any definite conclusions based on prima facie material, while considering bail application. Hence, point for consideration is answered in negative. Consequently following: ORDER Both Criminal Petitions are dismissed. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17