- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9886 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI ASHOKA H. R. S/O SRI RAJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O: HETHAGONAHALLI VILLAGE, SANTHEBACHAHALLI HOBLI, K. R. PET TALUK, MANDYA 577133. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M.B.., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY K. R. PET TOWN POLICE STATION, NAGAMANGALA SUB DIVISION CIRCLE, MANDYA DISTRICT 577133, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU 560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY. R., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN S.C. NO.5082 OF 2022, ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT MANDYA (SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATNA), ON THE BASIS OF CHARGE SHEET / FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN CR. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 NO.0167/2022, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.302 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.167/2022 of K.R.Pet Town Police Station, Mandya, registered for the offence punishable under Section 143, 114, 120B, 504, 498A, 302 read with Section 149 IPC. 2. Charge sheet is filed for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. 3. This petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 4. In brief, it is the case of prosecution that deceased Smt. Rani is the wife of petitioner. She was working in a factory situated on K.R.Pet - Mysuru Road. Petitioner had a grouse with her since she was coming to the house in the late night and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 talking to others on mobile phone. In this regard, petitioner had advised her. On 18.07.2022 at 12.30 - 1.00 a.m., when the deceased was sleeping in the house, the petitioner dropped a size stone on her head 2-3 times and committed her murder. Thereafter, he himself went to the police station and surrendered. 5. Petitioner was arrested on 19.07.2022 and he is in judicial custody since then. 6. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that, the entire case in based on circumstantial evidence. There are no eye witnesses to the incident. Further, the fact that the petitioner himself surrendered before the police, goes to show that he had no intention to commit the murder and the incident could have happened in a fit of anger and on sudden provocation and therefore, the ingredients of Section 302 are not attracted. Further contended that, the petitioner has not absconded, which shows there is no flight risk and therefore, there is no impediment to enlarge the petitioner on bail. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 7. It is further contended by the learned counsel that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 19.07.2022 i.e., for more than three years. Charges are framed on 11.07.2023, but so far none of the prosecution witnesses are examined and therefore, contended that, right of the petitioner to have a speedy trial has been defeated. He has relied on paragraph No. 17 of a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in JAVED GULAM NABI SHAIKH V/s. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANTOHER, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, which is extracted hereunder: "If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution than the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime." - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 8. Per Contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that, petitioner has committed the murder of his wife, by dropping a big stone on her head 2-3 times when she was sleeping. He contended that the incident has taken place inside the house and petitioner himself went to the police station and confessed about the crime and during investigation, blood stained T-Shirt, night pant and jerkin of the petitioner have been seized. Therefore, there is a prima-facie case against the petitioner. 9. The incident has taken place during intervening night of 18.07.2022 and 19.07.2022, in the house of the petitioner where he was living along with his wife (deceased). As per the postmortem report, cause of death is on account of cardio respiratory arrest due to severe head injury. A size stone was seized from the spot. T-Shirt, night pant and jerkin of the petitioner were blood stained and they were seized at his instance. Petitioner himself has gone to the police station and confessed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 before the police and that itself is not a ground to hold at this stage that he had no intention to commit the murder. According to prosecution, when the deceased was sleeping, at about 12.30 - 1.00 a.m., petitioner dropped a big stone on her head 2-3 times. The investigation material reveals that the petitioner had a grouse against the deceased as she was coming home in the late night, hence, he was suspecting her fidelity. 10. In so far as the contention raised by the learned counsel regarding delay in Trial is concerned, considering the gravity of the offence and the punishment prescribed, the incarceration now undergone by the petitioner is not a ground to enlarge him on bail. While considering a bail application, the nature and gravity of the offence and chances of accused tampering the witnesses and fleeing from justice, apart from other criteria, have to be kept in mind. The complainant is none other than the mother-in- law of the petitioner. That being so, there is a likelihood of tampering the witnesses, if the petitioner is enlarged on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32923 CRL.P No. 9886 of 2025 bail. Hence, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28