- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104442 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)-) BETWEEN: SANTOSH S/O LAGAMA NAIK, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: NEAR BEDARWADI KAMAN, TQ: KAGAL, DIST: KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA- 416216. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANGAMESH S. GHULAPPANAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY PSI, NIPPANI RURAL PS, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ORDER TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER WHO IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.3 ON REGULAR BAIL IN NIPPANI RURAL PS CRIME NO. 93/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 61(2)(a), 332 (a), 103, 238 R/W SEC. 3(5) OF BNS, 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED VII ADDL. DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI, SITTING AT CHIKKODI, BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner/accused No.3 is before this Court seeking for regular bail in Crime No.93/2024 of respondent- police for the offences under Sections 61(2)(a), 332 (a), 103, 238 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 04.12.2024, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant before the respondent –police, stating that he is residing along with his parents in his farmhouse. The elder brother of his father, namely, Sukant S/o Shivaram Naik had also constructed a house in the agricultural land situated adjacent to the house of the complainant. The complainant had received a phone call from his father stating that Ravi and others went inside the house of Mangala and they closed the door of the house and there was a sound of quarrel being heard, however, as he was not able to wake up and go, the complainant asked his son to come immediately to see the situation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 3. On receiving the said information, the son of the complainant left Mamadapur on his bike and also informed his cousin brother Avinash S/o Prakash Naik. Both came together and went inside the house of Mangala and found that Mangala and her son Prajwal were lying in a pool of blood. They were killed by the accused. Immediately, the complainant called his friends, namely, Deepak and Raju and lodged a complaint against Ravi and others for having committed the murder of Mangala and her son. 4. The respondent -police have registered a case in Crime No.93/2024 and conducted investigation. After conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet 5. Heard Sri.Sangamesh S.Ghulappanavar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 6. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The entire case is based on the confessional statement of the co-accused, which is not admissible in the evidence. As per the statement of the eyewitness, namely, Prajakta, on hearing the sound of her - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 mother, she and her brother Prajwal went to the kitchen room and saw that accused No.1-Ravi was assaulting her mother with a sword, accused No.2- Lokesh was assaulting with a shock observer which contained steel pipe. Though, it is alleged that accused No.3 was assaulting with a knife, as per the post- mortem report, the cause death of deceased Mangala and her son Prajwal was due to haemorrhagic shock, as a result of crushed head injuries sustained to the head (brain). Considering the said aspect, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 7. Per Contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent – State submitted that the petitioner and others have committed a heinous offence. They have killed Mangala and her son brutally. The said murder has created havoc in the locality. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it certainly gives a wrong impact on the society and there may be chances of others committing similar offences. In order to give a strong message to the society at large, it is appropriate not to grant bail to the petitioner. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP for the respondent – State prays to dismiss the petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also on perusal of the over-act attributed against the present petitioner, it is stated that the complainant had received a phone call from his father stating that Ravi and others went inside the house of deceased Mangala and there was a quarrel which had been taken place inside the house of Mangala and asked the complainant to come immediately to the house. However, the prosecution has projected that Prajakta, who is the daughter of the deceased Mangala is the eyewitness to the incident. According to her, the present petitioner was assaulting Mangala with a knife. However, the post-mortem report would indicate that the death of Mangala and her son was due to head crushed injuries (brain). 9. Having considered the inconsistencies and also the over-act attributed against the petitioner without adverting to the merits of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the present petitioner has made out a case to grant him bail. 10. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15908 CRL.P No. 104442 of 2025 (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.93/2024 of respondent-police for the offences stated supra, on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. (iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (v) The petitioner shall not commit any criminal cases till disposal of the case. 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 VMB/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48