- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102844 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SUNIL MALLIKARJUN MURKIBHAVI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. PRASAD SURESH BADIGER AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O VIVEKANAND NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. VINAYAK ALIAS VINAYKAGOUD MARIGOUDA, MUDIGOUDAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SAINATH ALIAS PADDU ISHWAR PAWADI, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 5. DATTATREYA ALIAS RAJU BASAVANNI JADHAV, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, MARATHA GALLI, GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S BADAWADAGI,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY GOKAK POLICE, THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.08.2024 PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN SPL.CASE NO. 202/2020 ON APPLICATION FILED U/SEC. 267 OF CR.P.C. BY A1, 12, 13, 15 AND 19 AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI) Petitioners who are as accused Nos.1, 12, 13, 15 and 19 have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 02.08.2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Spl.C.No.202/2020, rejecting the application filed by them - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 under Section 267 Cr.P.C for a direction to the Jail authorities to produce them before the Court. 2. It is contended by the petitioners that a charge sheet is filed against them and others in Cr.No.72/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 150, 341, 302, 120(B), 212, 201, 109, 115, 504, 506 r/w Sections 34, 35, 37 and 149 IPC and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), 8(1) of SC/ST (POA) Act, Section 25(1)A, 25(1)BVI(6), (7) of Arms Act. Additional charge sheet is also filed against them for the offences punishable under 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5) and 4 of Karnataka Control of Organised Crime Act, 2000 ('KCOC Act' for short). The petitioners are in judicial custody. They have engaged a new counsel. Due to COVID and other reasons, they are not produced before the Court. There are no arrangements and privacy in Jail for the petitioners to discuss with their counsel. On account of their non-production before the Court, they are not able to give proper instructions to their counsel. Due to technical problem, it is not possible for - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 them to follow the Court proceedings through video conferencing. The non-production before the trial Court violates their fundamental right for life and liberty. Hence, directions may be issued to the concerned police to produce them before the Court at the trial. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor filed objections to the said application stating that petitioner are notorious criminals. If they are produced before the Court physically, there is chance of violence and thereby public security and safety of the accused persons will also be in danger. The followers of accused persons visit them when they are produced before the Court causing lots of problem. As per Notification No.HCC 18/2020 dated 08.12.2020 issued by the Hon'ble High Court, there is provision for production of under trial prisoners before the Court through Video Conferencing and sought for dismissal of the application. 4. Accepting the reasons assigned for non production of accused persons before the Court, the trial Court has rejected the application filed by these accused. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 5. Challenging the same, they have come before this Court contending that Court has committed error in rejecting the application filed by them. It has not appreciated the grounds urged by the accused persons. Non production of these accused persons before the Court has caused prejudice to them, as they are not able to give proper instructions to their counsel to conduct their case. Due to technical issue, they are not able to hear the proceedings and co-ordinate with their counsel. The fact that their physical production would create Law and order problem is not a justifiable grounds to deny the petitioners the right to participate in the trial and defend themselves. It violates their fundamental right to life and liberty. Viewed from any angle, the application is not sustainable and pray to set aside the same, allow the application/petition filed by the accused persons and give direction to the concerned Jail authorities to produce them before the Court physically. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 6. Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted oral objections to the effect that the petitioners and other accused persons are the leaders and members of Tiger gang and they are very active in Gokak city. Therefore, when they are produced before the Court, their supporters and followers gather and causes law and order situation. The petitioners are notorious criminals, they have been kept in different jail and, if produced there is likelihood of they conspiring to commit further offences. They are also rowdy sheeters. On 12.02.2021, these accused were produced before the committal Court, there followers created problem. Large number of police force is required for the production of these accused persons. In fact Notification dated 08.12.2020 of the Hon'ble High Court permit production of accused through video conferencing and pray to reject the petition. 7. Heard arguments and perused the record. 8. Thus, petitioners who are accused Nos.1, 12, 13, 15 and 19, filed this petition with a prayer to issue - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 direction to the concerned Jail authorities to produce them before the trial Court at the trial. 9. The case of the prosecution is that, based on a complaint lodged by respondent No.2 – complainant on 06.05.2020, Gokak Town Police registered a case in Crime No.72/2020. Initially the case was registered against accused Nos.1 to 3 and some unknown persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and Sections 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as SC/ST (POA) Act. Respondent No.2 – complainant states in his complaint that, he is the resident of Jambava Nagar, Gokak and the deceased Siddappa Kanamaddi was State Youth President of Dalit Sangharha Samiti. Accused Gangadhar Shinde and his associates had rivalry with deceased in connection with murder of one Mr. Rohit Patil. There was also rivalry between Scheduled - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 Caste Community and Maratha Community and on account of the same, there are some cases registered. 10. It is further stated that, on 06.05.2020 at 8.00 p.m., respondent No.2 - complainant along with his friend Siddappa Kanamaddi (deceased), Kiran Shankar Kadatti, Raju Huchhannavar, Prashant Patrut were sitting at Katta of Hanuman Temple, Jambav Nagar, Siddappa Kanamaddi was speaking over phone. During that time, Gangadhar Shinde, Vinayak Hadaginal, Vitthal Pawar along with some other persons came on two-wheeler and auto-rickshaw holding talwar and assaulted Siddappa Kanamaddi and abused him tallying caste name as “Holya Sulemagana, ninna bidangilla”. When the complainant along with other friends tried to save Siddappa Kanamaddi, accused threatened them with dire consequences, in case they interfered. 11. The said persons assaulted Siddappa Kanamaddi and he sustained grievous injuries on his head, nose, left hand and on chest. They immediately shifted - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 him to the Umrani Hospital and later, he was shifted to KLE Hospital, Belagavi. Siddappa has stated the names of some of the accused at the time of his death and the same was also video recorded. Siddappa Kanamaddi died due to severe injuries caused by the accused. After the death of Siddappa Kanamaddi, police have incorporated Section 302 of IPC. During the course of investigation, Inspector General of Police, Northern Range, Belagavi has accorded permission on 17.07.2020 to the Investigating Officer as per the mandate of Section 24(1)(a) of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crime Act, 2000 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as “KCOC Act”) to invoke the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of KCOC Act upon the application made by the Investigating Officer. 12. After completing the investigation, the charge- sheet has been filed for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 150, 341, 120(B), 302, 109, 115, 212, 201, 504, 506 read with Section 34, 35, 37, 149 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of KCOC Act and Section - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 3(1)(s), Section 3(2)(v), Section 3(2)(v,a), 8(1)A of SC/ST (POA) Act and Section 25(1)A, 251(b) of Arms Act, against accused Nos.1 to 17 and 21. Accused Nos.18, 19 and 20 are absconding, as such, the Special Court has issued proclamation. 13. According to the prosecution, the petitioners and other accused are members of Tiger gang. They are notorious criminal involved in several offences. Looking to the gravity of the offence committed and their rowdy status and the provisions of coca act is also invoked against them. Some of the accused are still absconding. Trial against petitioners and other accused is going on. The grievance of the petitioner is that they are not produced before the trial Court on all the hearing dates and on the other hand, they are produced through video conferencing and due to poor connection, the proceedings are not properly audible. Since in the jail, there is no proper provision holding conference with their advocates, they are - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 not able to instruct their counsel to defend them effectively. 14. On the other hand, the grievance of the prosecution is that since the petitioners and other accused persons are notorious criminals, whenever they are produced before Court, their followers come in huge numbers, causing law and order problem. In order to control them, large number of police personnel are required and therefore they are being produced through Video conferencing, which is permissible as per the Notification issued by the High Court. 15. It is true that since the petitioner and other accused persons belong to Tiger gang, they are having many supporters who are also criminals and the possibility of they gathering and causing law and order situation cannot be ruled out. However, it is not a ground not to produce the petitioners before the Court continuously at the trial. Section 273 of the Code of Criminal Procedure mandates that evidence is to be recorded in the presence - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 of the accused, except when expressly provided otherwise. Of course when accused seek exemption and file necessary application, the Court may exempt him from attendance, but he cannot take advantage of the same and also dispute his identity when the witnesses are examined in his absence. It is the right of the accused to be present when the trial is held against him. 16. Such being the case, the State and the prosecution cannot deny this right to the accused on the ground that, their production would cause prejudice and create law and order situation. It is for the State to make necessary arrangements for the safe production of the petitioners and other accused and also for the safety of the general public. If the production of these accused would cause a situation which is not possible to be controlled, then if necessary trial may be held in the jail itself, by taking necessary permission from the High Court and Government. - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 17. The Notification dated 08.12.2020 issued by this Court relates to consolidation, unify and streamline of the procedure relating to use of video conferencing for Courts. Perusal of the same indicate that production of accused through video conferencing may be resorted to in securing judicial remand routinely, but in case of recording evidence, where there is disturbance in the transmission it may not be an option. The very purpose of producing the accused through video conferencing during recording of evidence would be defeated if there is any disturbance in the transmission. It should be resorted as an exception rather than a general rule. 18. Since the petitioners are kept in different jail, there may be situation when it is not possible for the concerned jailer to produce some of them. Depending upon the exigency and situation, they may seek permission from the concerned Court for non production of them. However, the petitioners cannot be denied their right of trial being held in their presence, totally. As a - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 General Rule, they shall be produced before the trial Court at the hearing, especially during trial and in exceptional case, their production may be exempted and that they may be produced through Video Conferencing. For these reasons, the application filed by the petitioners deserves to be allowed and the impugned order is liable to be modified and accordingly, the following: ORDER 1. Petition filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 12, 13, 15 and 19 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is allowed in part. 2. The concerned Jail authority shall produce petitioners and other accused who are in judicial custody in the present case before the trial Court on all the hearing dates when evidence is being recorded, for recording 313 statement, defence evidence, - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 if any, and when the judgment is pronounced. 3. However, for reasons beyond the control of the jail authorities, if it is not possible to produce them, they may intimate the trial Court about the same. 4. At the same time, the jail authority shall make proper arrangement for production of accused who are in judicial custody through Video Conferencing without there being any interruption, whenever they could not be produced physically. 5. At the same time, the defence shall go with the case without seeking any adjustments whenever witnesses are present. 6. When the petitioners and other accused are produced before the Court, the State shall make proper arrangement for their safe - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7007 CRL.P No. 102844 of 2024 custody and also for the safety of the general public and others. In case the followers and family members of petitioners and other accused who are in judicial custody try to contact them and create any law and order situation, the State shall take stringent action against them. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1