- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104096 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SANJAPPA @ SANJU S/O. TIPPANNA BENGERI, AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. NIL, H.NO.25, MAILARLINGESHWAR NAGAR, GOKUL VILLAGE, HUBBALLI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN HUCHARADDI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH GOKUL ROAD PS, HUBLI, R/BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., (483 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, THAT, THE ACCUSED NO.1/PETITIONER MAY BE ENLARGED ON BAIL IN SC NO.21/2019 (GOKUL ROAD PS CRIME NO.66/2018), PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 201, 120(B), R/W 34 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1, is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.66/2018 of respondent/Police for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B) r/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 18601. Brief facts of the case; 2. The case of the prosecution is that, accused No.1 had obtained Insurance from HDFC Bank and made his elder brother as a nominee to the said Policy. In order to knock off the insurance amount, he hatched a plan to commit murder of a person who resemblance him. The said plan was communicated to accused No.2. Both went to Railway Station and searched a person in the said railway station who resembling him. It is stated that accused No.1 1 For short ‘IPC’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 told the said person that he was having work and asked the said person to accompany him to get the said work done. In the said pretext, he took the said person and went along with accused No.2. It is stated that the said person had been killed and his face was disfigured to conceal the identity and thrown the dead body near the bridge. 3. An information was given to the Police regarding the dead body. Based on the said information, the respondent/Police registered a case and conducted investigation. After conducting investigation, charge-sheet was submitted. 4. Heard Sri.Praveen Hucharaddi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire case is based on the circumstantial evidence. Though it is alleged that the murder took place to knock off the insurance amount, the nominee of the said - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 policy, namely, brother of accused No.1 had not claimed insurance amount claiming that his brother was dead. 6. It is further submitted that, the petitioner is aged about 26 years and he is the only earning member of the family and he is the permanent resident of Hubballi and he will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State vehemently submitted that, the entire case is based on the circumstantial evidence. There are witnesses to depose that, before the incident, the deceased went along with accused No.2 and thereafter, he was found dead near the under bridge of Revadihal village. It is stated that the evidence has been commenced and 13 witnesses have been examined, at that juncture, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of tampering the prosecution - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 witnesses. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail, is the submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the charge-sheet, it appears from the records, that 13 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. None of them have supported the case of the prosecution. Moreover, the entire case is based on the circumstantial witnesses. Under such circumstances, it is appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions. 9. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.66/2018 of respondent/Police on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16185 CRL.P No. 104096 of 2025 the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court subject to following condition; (a) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. (b) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (c) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal cases till disposal of the case. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE PJ/CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18