- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100566 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT) BETWEEN: SHIVANAND S/O. KEMPANNA GHASTI, AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. MADAMAKKANAL VILLAGE, IN HUKKERI TALUKA, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHARAD MALGOUND PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT: DHARWAD THROUGH SHO HUKKERI, POLICE STATION. 2. SHIVANAND S/O. VIJAY KAMBLE AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. MADAMAKKANAL VILLAGE, IN HUKKERI TALUKA, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT 1989, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31/07/2025 PASSED IN CRL MIS NO.00747/2025 BY THE III ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI AND TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.79/2025 REGISTERED BY HUKKERI CIRCLE POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION-103(1) R/W 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND ALSO UNDER SECTION 3(2)(VA) OF PREVENTION ATROCITIES AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 AND ETC.,. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The appellant in this case is arrayed as accused No.4, subsequently, in the charge sheet he has been arrayed as accused No.3, is before this Court seeking for regular bail in Crime No.79/2025 of respondent-police for the offences under Sections 103(1) read with Section 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment, 2015. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.1 and 2 were doing centring work along with complainant and his brother Sachin. There was a dispute in respect of said work between accused No.1 and the brother of the complainant. As a result of which, accused Nos.1 and 2 have left the work and went to work with Ganesh @ Gajanan Chandrakant Harijan. The brother of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 complainant had quarrelled with Ganesh @ Gajanan stating that why he had called the workers who were working along with them. 3. It is further stated that accused Nos.1, 2 and the present petitioner hatched a conspiracy to commit the murder of brother of the complainant. On 09.06.2025, it is alleged that they killed the deceased. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered against the accused persons. 4. Based on the said complaint, the respondent- police have registered a case and after conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet. 5. Heard Sri. Sharad Malgound Patil, learned counsel for appellant, Sri. Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Smt. Shaila Bellikatti, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 6. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that, the appellant is arrayed as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. The allegations made against him that he hatched the conspiracy along with accused Nos.1 and 2 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 who committed murder of Sachin, the brother of the complainant. 7. It is further submitted that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The overt - act attributed against the appellant is based on voluntary statement of co-accused. The appellant is the earning member of the family and he was doing cantering work. The appellant is the permanent resident of Madamakkanal village, Hukkeri Taluka and he will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently submitted that accused Nos.1 and 2 were earlier working along with the complainant and his brother. As there was a dispute between accused Nos.1 and 2 and the complainant, they left the job and joined with accused No.3 for the said centring work. There was a quarrel between accused No.3 and the deceased Sachin in respect of man power. The appellant had hatched conspiracy along with accused Nos.1 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 and 2 to eliminate the brother of the complainant. Accordingly, they executed the plan and committed the murder of the deceased. When the case rests on circumstantial evidence, motive assumes greater significance. As the motive for the murder has been proved, filing the charge sheet, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 prays to reject the appeal. 9. Similarly, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State adopted the arguments of the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and prays to dismiss the appeal. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the record that the appellant is arrayed as accused No.3. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. Though, the averments of the complaint would indicate that the accused No.3 was having a grudge with the deceased in respect of supply of man power, that itself is not sufficient to indicate that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 murder had taken place on account of that motive. As the specific overt – act has not been defined in the charge sheet against the appellant, it is appropriate to grant him bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.79/2025 of respondent-police, on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. (iii) The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. (iv) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17661 CRL.A No. 100566 of 2025 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 SMM/CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10