- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102369 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMAD GHOUSE IDAYATULLA @ BASHA @ STORE BASHA, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB, R/O. WARD NO.10, RANITOTHA, TQ. BALLARY, DIST. BALLARY-583101. 2. SHASHAVALLI @ DOOD PEER @ DODDU @ PANNEND S/O. IMAMASAB, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB, R/O. WARD NO.10, BASHA MAZID, OPP. AREA, RANITOTHA, TQ. BALLARY, DIST. BALLARY. 3. MOHAMMAD SHARIF S/O. LATE SHAIKSHAVALI, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. WARD NO.10, NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL, TQ. BALLARY, DIST. BALLARY. 4. MOHAMMAD ASIF S/O. BASHA @ IDAYATULLA @ BASHA @ STORE BASHA, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. WARD NO.10, RANITOTHA, TQ. BALLARY, DIST. BALLARY. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VADIRAJ P. VADAVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY PSI, BRUCEPET P.S., TQ. BALLARI, DIST. BALLARI, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. S.P.P., HIGH COURT PREMISES, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 3, 6, 7 AND 8 ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.53/2025 REGISTERED BY BRUCEPET PS, DIST. BALLARY ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BALLARI COURT, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103, 238(c), 61(1), 49 R/W SECTION 190 OF BNS (BNS) 2023, AND ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THE THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. Vadiraj P. Wadavi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 2. The petitioners – accused Nos.3, 6, 7 and 8 have filed this petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) to enlarge them on bail in connection with Crime No.53/2025 of Brucepet Police Station, Ballari District on the file of learned I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ballari, for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103, 238(c), 61(1), 49 read with Section 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: The marriage of the first informant (accused No.1) solemnized with the deceased Venkatesh about 16 years ago. The deceased used to consume alcohol and harass the first informant to give money for consuming alcohol. On 01.04.2025 the deceased came to the house of the first informant to celebrate a program in their house. On 03.04.2025 at about - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 06:00 p.m., the deceased left the house of first informant in order to consume alcohol, but did not return home even at night. On 04.04.2025 at about 06:30 a.m., the first informant came to know that her husband is lying dead near the Ultragate Kanekal Road, opposite to K.J. Prajwal Cotton Industries, Ballari. In this regard, she lodged a complaint. This led to registration of FIR and initiation of the investigation. During the course of investigation, the petitioners and others were arrested by the respondent – Police. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offences and have been falsely implicated in this case. There is no overt act alleged against them and nothing is recovered from these petitioners. The only allegation is that these petitioners also assaulted deceased with their legs and club. Now the investigation is completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet. The petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. With these grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed to allow the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 5. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that the petitioners are involved in the offence punishable under Section 103 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and there is prima facie case against them and the witness to the incident have identified accused Nos.3, 6, 7 and 8 and accordingly they have stated before the learned Magistrate while recording the statement of CWs.11 and 12 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Hence, considering the nature and gravity of offences, petitioners are not entitled for bail. Hence, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of the petition. 6. Perused the entire charge sheet material. It reveals that accused No.1 is none other than the wife of the deceased Venkatesh. As he was harassing accused No.1, she gave supari to accused No.2, who in-turn secured the assistance of accused Nos.3 to 11, to eliminate the deceased. As per the statement of CWs.11 and 12, recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., they have stated that about 10 and 11 persons assaulted the deceased with chopper, clubs etc., at the scene of offence but they did not pacify the quarrel and even they have not ascertained their names. The alleged incident took place on 03.04.2025 and their statement was recorded on 06.04.2025 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 i.e., after 3 days of the incident. It is not the case of the prosecution that soon after the alleged incident, CWs.11 and 12 have informed the incident to the first informant nor reported to the nearest Police Station and the incident came to the light of the first informant on the following day i.e., on 04.04.2025 at 06:30 a.m. Admittedly, the names of these petitioners not found place in the FIR. In the absence of the statement of CWs.11 and 12, the entire case appears to be based on circumstantial evidence. The Investigating Officer has not recorded any incriminating articles from accused Nos.3, 6, 7 and 8. The charge sheet material reveals that all incriminating articles were recovered at the instance of accused Nos.2 and 4 alone. 7. As per the postmortem examination report, deceased Venkatesh sustained in all 17 multiple injuries and the cause of death is due to hemorrhage shock as a result of multiple injuries to the vital organs sustained. However, the deceased consumed ethanol alcohol prior to the death. Even CWs.11 and 12 have witnessed the incident they have not stated as to how they seen the incident whether they seen the incident through the light of motorcycle or through any street - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 light. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that there is prima facie allegations against accused Nos.1, 2 and 4. 8. It is well established principle of law that while considering the bail application, the Court has to consider the nature of offence, circumstances in which the offence is committed, position and the status of the petitioners, likelihood of accused fleeing away from justice, tampering of witnesses, character and antecedent of the accused. Further, the law is well settled that, while disposing off the bail petitions, the Court need not scan the prosecution papers and hold a mini trial. Keeping these factors in mind and on careful perusal of the entire material placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.53/2025 of respondent – Police Station on they executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with two sureties - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9082 CRL.P No. 102369 of 2025 for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: i. Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. ii. Petitioners shall appear before the Court regularly without fail. iii. Petitioners shall not commit similar offences. iv. Violation of any of these conditions would entail for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE Rsh /ct-an List no.: 1 sl no.: 8