- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101710 OF 2025 (438 OF Cr.PC/482 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: SHRI HANAMANTH S/O. SATHYAPPA KADEMANI, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HATALAGERI, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, GADAG-582115. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RASHMI P. MANDI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SHO GADAG RURAL POLICE, R/BY. ITS HIGH COURT ADDITIONAL STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BENCH AT: DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C. (U/S 482 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.18 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY THE GADAG RURAL POLICE IN MAIN C.C. NO.2662/2021 (G. R. P.S CR. NO.110/2021) WITH SPLIT UP CHARGE SHEET IN C.C. NO.685/2023 AS PER ORDER DATED 29/05/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-II, GADAG FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 143, 147, 148, 353, 332, 504 R/W. 149 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Ms. Rashmi P. Mandi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 2. This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.110/2021 registered at Gadag Rural Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 332, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: On 10.06.2021 at approximately 07:15 a.m., the accused persons allegedly formed an unlawful assembly near the public road in Ambedkar Nagar, Hathalageri Village, Gadag District. Armed with stones, clubs, and iron rods, they were said to have engaged in rioting with the intent to commit offences against the leaders of the Gollar - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 community. During this incident, CWs.1 and 4 to 9, who were on public duty at the time, were reportedly obstructed by the accused from performing their official duties. It is further alleged that the accused assaulted these officials using hands, legs, stones, clubs, and iron rods, thereby caused them injuries. Apprehending arrest by the respondent – Police, the petitioner – accused No.18 has filed the present petition seeking anticipatory bail. 4. It is urged in the bail petition that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He undertakes to appear before the Court on all the hearing dates and undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that there are reasonable grounds to believe that accused has committed the alleged offences and he is proclaimed offender, he has absconded for almost three and a half - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 year. Therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Hence, prayed for rejection of the bail petition. 6. Perusal of the material on record, it shows that on 01.07.2021, this petitioner – accused No.18 was enlarged on bail by the Trial Court, subject to execution of personal bond for Rs.30,000/- with a surety for the like sum. However, during subsequent period, accused No.18 remained absent. Later, the Investigating Officer concluded investigation and filed charge sheet by showing accused No.18 as absconding and accordingly filed a split up charge sheet against accused No.18. 7. It shows that, it is a case of bail jump inasmuch as the present petitioner was granted bail by the Trial Court and on subsequent dates, the accused remained absent, thus, the Trial Court issued non-bailable warrant and also proclamation against the petitioner. 8. It is pertinent to note that whenever it is a case of jumping of bail by the accused whether there requires - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 an order to be passed by the Court as to the actual bond or not was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sadananda v. State of Karnataka1. Wherein, the Co-ordinate Bench has clearly held that jumping of bail automatically results in forfeiture of the bond and no separate order is necessary as to forfeiture of the bond amount is concerned. 9. Further, insofar as the surety is concerned, there is a provision under Cr.P.C. i.e., Section 446(2) of Cr.P.C. that the Court may order for remission of portion of the bond amount in the event the Court is satisfied that the surety did all his best to secure the presence of the accused, but he was unable to do so. But, similar provision is not available for remission of the bond amount insofar as the accused is concerned. Therefore, the unequivocal bond is executed by the petitioner in favour of the State promising his presence before the Court till the bond comes to an end by process known to law. When such 1 ILR 1985 KAR 2813 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 promise is broken, entirely on the acts that could be attributable to the conduct of the accused, there cannot be any other plea that the accused can raise insofar as the forfeiture of the bond is concerned. Therefore, this Court finds sufficient force in the arguments advanced by the learned HCGP that in case this Court has to consider grant of bail again to the accused, one of the necessary conditions that would be imposed by this Court is recovery of the earlier bond amount. 10. Therefore, though it is not a case where the accused is entitled to grant of bail as of right, especially when it is stated in the petition that he had not filed any other similar petition before any other Court for the same relief, this Court in the interest of justice is resorting to allow the bail petition by using the discretionary and special powers vested in this Court for affording one more opportunity for petitioner to participate in the trial by remaining outside Court on bail. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner is ready to deposit the earlier bond amount executed by him. 12. Her submission is placed on record. Thus, the petitioner is entitled for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The criminal petition is allowed. ii. The petitioner shall be released on bail on he executing a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with a surety for like sum in Crime No.110/2021 of Gadaga Rural P.S., in the event of his arrest by the Police. iii. The petitioner shall deposit the previous bond amount of Rs.30,000/- before the Trial Court before he released on bail. iv. The petitioner shall execute a fresh bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with a surety for like sum. v. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7941 CRL.P No. 101710 of 2025 vi. It is made clear that, the Trial Court shall issue a release intimation for the release of the accused, subject to condition that, the petitioner shall deposit the earlier bond amount, before issue of release intimation to the prison. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RSH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15