- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101806 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: SHRI ISHWARAPPA S/O. RANGAPPA KYADAGIHALLIM AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O, BENNEHALLI, TQ. MUNDARGI, DIST. GADAG-582118. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY MUNDARAGI P.S, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S.483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO GRANT HIM REGULAR BAIL IN THE CRIME NO.167/2024 OF MUNDARGI POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.333, 103(1) BNS-2023 PENDING BEFORE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE GADAG IN S.C.NO.18/2025, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 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:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. N.D. Gunde, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Abhishek Malipatil, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. [Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] seeking regular bail in S.C. No.18/2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Gadag for the offences punishable under Sections 333 and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: The deceased and the accused were siblings — sister and brother, respectively. The deceased, Kalavva was married to the first informant approximately nine years prior and was residing with him at the time of the incident. In the year 2024, Kalavva filed a civil suit for partition (O.S. No.55/2024) before the Civil Court at Mundargi against the accused, seeking her share in the family property. The accused had requested her to withdraw the suit; however, upon her refusal, he developed a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 grudge against her. On 24.09.2024, the accused went to the residence of the deceased, located at Kyadagihalli Chawl, H.M. Nagar. A quarrel ensued, during which the accused assaulted Kalavva with a knife, inflicting multiple injuries to her chest and other parts of her body, resulting in her death. Following the incident, the first informant lodged a complaint with the Police, which led to the registration of an FIR and the commencement of an investigation. During the course of the investigation, the accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent, has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no overt act alleged against him and nothing has been recovered under his possession. The case is based on circumstantial evidence and no eye witnesses have seen the incident. The investigation is completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet against the accused. The petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. On all these grounds, the learned counsel prayed to allow the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 5. The learned HCGP for the respondent–State submitted that the petitioner is involved in the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. There exists a prima facie case against the accused. Bloodstained clothes belonging to the accused were recovered at his instance. The clothes seized from both the deceased and the accused were sent for chemical analysis, and the results confirmed that the blood found on the accused’s clothes matches the blood group of the deceased. It is further contended that if the accused is released on bail, there is likelihood that he may tamper with prosecution witnesses and hinder the course of trial. In view of the nature and gravity of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. Hence, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of the bail petition. 6. The materials available on record discloses that, the Investigating Officer, upon completion of the investigation, has filed the charge sheet. It appears that the prosecution case is primarily based on circumstantial evidence, including motive, the last seen theory, recovery, and the conduct of the accused. As per the charge sheet, CW9 and CW16 are cited as "last seen" witnesses. However, upon examining their statements, it - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 is evident that CW9 is not a direct "last seen" witness; rather, the information attributed to CW9 was gathered and narrated by CW16. Further, CW16’s statement merely repeats what was allegedly stated by CW9, and appears to be in a cyclostyled format, raising doubts about its authenticity. Additionally, CW17, who is also listed as a "last seen" witness, has stated that immediately after the incident, the husband of the deceased and the Police arrived at the scene. This statement contradicts the versions given by CW9 and CW16, thereby casting further doubt on the consistency and reliability of the prosecution's "last seen" theory. 7. With regard to the recovery of the bloodstained clothes of the accused, the Investigating Officer recovered article Nos.1 to 3, which were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for chemical analysis. The FSL report indicates that the said articles were stained with blood of group 'A'. According to the medical report, the blood group of the deceased is also 'A'. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of the petitioner’s driving licence, which also shows that his blood group is 'A'. Therefore, the question of whether the blood found on the recovered - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 clothes belongs to the deceased or the petitioner becomes a matter to be determined during the course of trial. Moreover, as already discussed, the statements of the "last seen" witnesses appear to be contradictory. It is also noted that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed. In such circumstances, the apprehension of the accused tampering with the prosecution witnesses does not appear to be well-founded. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking into the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, gravity of offence, severity of punishment, chances of petitioner absconding or fleeing away from justice if released on bail, character and antecedents of the petitioner tampering of the prosecution witnesses, the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail by imposing certain conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is hereby allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in S.C. No.18/2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7766 CRL.P No. 101806 of 2025 Sessions Judge, Gadag on his executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: i. Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses and shall not threaten the witnesses. ii. He shall appear before the Court regularly without fail. iii. He shall not involve himself in similar offences. NOTE: The above observation is made only for disposal of this petition. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RSH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36