- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100138 OF 2025 BETWEEN: BASAYYA @ BASAPPA S/O. TIMMAYYA, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SANGALPETH, TQ: SINDHANUR, DIST: RAICHURU, NOW R/O: SHIRUR AGASI, BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHUBHENDU A. AKALWADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY BAGALKOT RURAL POLICE STATION, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. 2. LAXMI BAYI NELAGI W/O. ASHOK, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR, R/O: BEVINKATTI, TQ AND DIST: BAGALKOT – 587 112. (MOTHER OF VICTIM) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. HANUMESH M. DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF SC/ST ACT SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO. 7 ON REGULAR BAIL IN BAGALKOTE RURAL PS CRIME NO. 178/2022 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 363, 302, 201, 120(b), 109 READ WITH 149 OF I.P.C. AND 3(2)(v) SC/ST, T.P.A. ACT-2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOTE UNDER SPL. CASE. NO.61/2023 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant –accused No.7 challenging the order dated 10.10.2024 passed in Special Case No.61/2023 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote where under the bail application of this appellant –accused No.7 sought in respect of Crime No.178/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 363, 302, 201(B), 120(B), 109 r/w. Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ for short) and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as “SC and ST Act” for short) came to be rejected. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant - accused No.7, learned High Court Government Pleader for - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. The factual matrix leading to the case of prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that on 28.9.2022 at 6.00 p.m. when complainant and his wife came back to home, another daughter Chaitra informed that Rajeshwari went out of the house stating that she is going to attend second nature call and did not return. Complainant and his wife have searched for their daughter - Rajeshwari and enquired with their relatives, but she was not traced. Therefore, missing complaint was filed by complainant, which came to be registered in Bagalkot Rural Police station Crime No.178/2022 for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC and Investigation was conducted. During the course of investigation, it is revealed that daughter of complainant-Rajeshwari was in love with Vishwanath belonging to Hindu Walmiki caste and the same was not acceptable to the father of Rajeshwari i.e. accused No.1. Hence, all the accused on - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 the instigation of accused No.1 traced Rajeshwari and kept her in fruit shop of accused No.7 near Shirur Agasi on Bagalkot - Hunagud road. On the basis of voluntary statement of accused - Ravi, it is revealed that accused No.1 conspired with other accused to kill Rajeshwari and Vishwanath. Hence, all the accused except accused Nos.1 and 3 called Vishwanath to Naragund on the pretext of arranging marriage and took Rajeshwari on the pretext that they will get her marriage with Vishwanath. On 30.9.2022, they picked up Vishwanath from Naragund and assaulted both, thereby committed their murder and thrown dead bodies in Krishna River between Alamatti and Hungund road. Investigating officer has completed the investigation filed charge sheet. 4. The appellant –accused No.7 who is in judicial custody has sought for grant of bail and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order. The said impugned order is challenged in this appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 5. Learned counsel for the appellant -accused No.7 would contend that except conspiracy and driving of Bolero pickup van, there is no overtact alleged against this appellant -accused No.7. There is no accusation of assault by this appellant -accused No.7. Dead bodies of deceased have not been recovered. The prosecution has already examined eighteen (18) witnesses, out of them C.W-13 (P.W.8) driver of TATA ACE has not supported the case of the prosecution. The appellant -accused No.7 is not related to accused Nos.1 to 4 who are related to the deceased – Rajeshwari. There is no recovery of any article at the instance of this appellant -accused No.7 except recovery of his mobile phone. The appellant -accused No.7 is in judicial custody since more than one year. As charge sheet is filed, this appellant -accused No.7 is not required for custodial interrogation. With these, he prays to allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellant -accused No.7. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that this appellant -accused No.7 was absconding - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 and separated charge sheet is filed against him. He has been arrested after one and half year after filing charge sheet. The plan of murder of deceased has taken place in the shop of this appellant -accused No.7. This appellant - accused No.7 is one of conspirator for killing of two innocent persons. C.W.28 and 29 are two eye witnesses who have seen burning of clothes of deceased. None of accused persons have been granted bail. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -State would submit that the case involves double murder and the prosecution witnesses namely PW.1 to 7, 9, 13, 17 and 20 have supported the case of the prosecution. This appellant -accused No.7 was driver of Bolero pickup van and he was present at the time when other accused were killing the deceased – Vishwanath. If the appellant –accused No.7 is granted bail, there are chances of tampering the prosecution witnesses and he could not be available for further trial. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 Considering the said aspects, the learned Special Judge has rightly rejected the bail application. With this, he prays for dismissal of the appeal. 8. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has perused the impugned order and the charge sheet materials. 9. On careful perusal of charge sheet material, it would go to show that complainant-accused No.1 is belongs to Hindu Kuruba community and Vishwanath belongs to Hindu Walmiki community. Complainant- accused No.1 was aware of his daughter being in love with Vishwanath and he was not happy of his daughter marrying to Vishwanath. However, daughter of complainant was insisting to perform her marriage with Vishwanath. The daughter of complainant Rajeshwari left the house with an intention to join Vishwanath, who was residing in Kasaragod. Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 went in a car to Mangalore and traced Rajeshwari on 27.9.2022, further they brought her back and kept in fruit shop of - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 accused No.7 situated near Shirur Agasi on Bagalkot - Hangund road and she was kept in the shop on 28.9.2022 and 29.9.2022. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 5 and juvenile offender Beerappa conspired with each other and pretended before Rajeshwari that they will get her marriage performed with Vishwanath. They called Vishwanath over phone and asked him to come to Naragund. They carried Rajeshwari in TATA ACE bearing No.KA-29/7820 from fruit shop of accused No.7. Thereafter, Bolero pickup van bearing No.KA-36/7807 belongs to fruit shop owner was boarded by accused Nos.2, 3 and 7. They picked up Vishwanath in front of Naragund bus stand on 30.09.2022 and carried him in bolero vehicle by asking the accused, who were in TATA ACE vehicle to follow them. Accused No.3 after getting down from Bolero vehicle picked up two stones and assaulted Vishwanath, who was caught hold by accused No.2 and juvenile offender Beerappa Dalwai. The daughter of complainant-Rajeshwari, who was in TATA ACE vehicle, along with accused No.4 and saw accused assaulting - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 Vishwanath in the head light of vehicle, questioned about assaulting Vishwanath and brought in vehicle by deceiving on the promise to get her marriage performed with Vishwanath. Thereafter, accused Nos.4 and 5 have strangulated neck of Rajeshwari and committed her murder. The driver of TATA ACE vehicle–CW.13 refused to accompany them and by paying rent, he was relieved. All the accused while they were on the way in Bolero vehicle found Vishwanath was still alive and lying on the road. At the instance of accused No.3, accused Nos.2 and 4 and juvenile offender Beerappa Dalwai caught hold both his hands and legs and accused No.5 by means of stone assaulted on the private part of Vishwanath, due to which he died. Thereafter, they undressed Rajeshwari and Vishwanath only by leaving innerwear and threw their dead bodies in Krishna river of on N.H.-50, Alamatti and Hungund road. 10. Considering the above aspect, the accusation against this appellant –accused No.7 is that deceased – - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 Rajeshwari has been kept in his fruit shop and conspiracy of murder has taken place in front of his shop and he is one of the conspirator. This appellant –accused No.7 was driving Bolero pickup van bearing No.KA-36/7807 and the vehicle belongs to him. The deceased -Vishwanath has been picked up from Naragund bus stand in the said Bolero pick up van which was driven by this appellant – accused No.7. Accused No.3 has assaulted the deceased – Vishwanath with two stones, at that time deceased was caught hold by accused No.2 and juvenile offender Beerappa Dalwai. There is no accusation against this appellant –accused No.7 assaulting the deceased – Vishwanath. The accusation of strangulating of deceased –Rajeshwari and committing her murder is by accused No.4 and 5. Considering the said aspect, there is no specific overtact alleged against this appellant –accused No.7 except conspiracy and driving of Bolero pickup van at the time of incident. The apprehension of the prosecution is that if this appellant –accused No.7 is granted bail he may threaten other prosecution witnesses and flee from - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 justice can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. Without considering all these aspects, learned trial Judge has erred in passing the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. The appellant –accused has made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order and grant of bail with conditions. 11. In the result, the following ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 10.10.2024 passed in Special Case No.61/2023 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote is set aside. iii) The appellant –accused No.7 is granted bail in Crime No.178/2022 of Bagalkote Police Station subject to following conditions a) The appellant –accused No.7 shall execute a personal bond for - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6791 CRL.A No. 100138 of 2025 Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. b) The appellant –accused No.7 shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses. c) The appellant –accused No.7 shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and co- operate in speedy disposal of the case. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DSP CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26