ADITYA S/O. MAHANTESH BALIKAYI, v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/102755/2025 · 2025-09-24
S Vishwajith Shetty
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62067 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62067 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102755 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
ADITYA S/O. MAHANTESH BALIKAYI, AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, R/O. MURGOD VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 119.
… PETITIONER (BY SMT. NAINA RAJENDRA NERLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH MURGOD P.S., BELAGAVI, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 011.
… RESPONDENT (BY SMT. K.R. PATIL, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON REGULAR BAIL IN MURGOD P.S. CRIME NO.299/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103(1) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 WHICH IS COMMITTED TO PRL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI AS SC NO.4/2025, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD
BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. The accused in S.C. No.4 of 2025 pending before the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, arising out of Crime No.299 of 2025 registered by Murgod Police Station, Ramadurga Sub-Division, Belagavi District for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the BNS, 2023, is before this Court under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.299 of 2024 was registered by Murgod Police Station, Ramadurga Sub-Division, Belagavi District for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner herein, based on the first information, dated 30.11.2024 received from Niyazahammad Kittur, who is the father of the deceased Mohammed Sohil, who was aged about 17 years. During the course of investigation, the petitioner
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
herein was arrested on 01.12.2024 and subsequently remanded to the judicial custody. After completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. His bail application filed before the trial Court was rejected. Therefore, he is before this Court. 4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the petitioner and the deceased were friends and it appears that they were both in love with CW12, who was aged about 17 years. In the first information, it is stated that on 30.11.2024 at about 07:00 a.m. Mohammed Sohil had gone out of the house to bring soap in his two-wheeler, but had not returned home. Therefore, at about 08:00 a.m. his father, who is the first informant, went towards the Bus Stand in search of his son. Thereafter, he received a phone call from Mehaboob Subani (CW13) who informed him that the petitioner had stabbed Mohammed Sohil with a knife and committed his murder. Immediately thereafter, the first informant and his elder son had gone to the alleged spot,
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
where the dead body of Mohammed Sohil was lying, which had multiple stab injuries. It is under these circumstances, FIR was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.299 of
2024. 5. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 01.12.2024 and was subsequently remanded to judicial custody.
After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner for the aforesaid offence. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that the petitioner and the deceased Mohammed Sohil, who were friends, were in love with CW12. It is in this background, there was ill-will between them. On 30.11.2024, they together had gone and met CW12 for the purpose of verifying from her with whom she was in love amongst them. CW12 allegedly informed them that she was in love with Mohammed Sohil and had thereafter gone to her College. The petitioner thereafter took Mohammed Sohil with him on the pretext of smoking cigarette and thereafter,
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
at the alleged spot of crime assaulted him with a knife, which he had with him and committed his murder. 6. The post-mortem report of the deceased would go to show that, the deceased had suffered as many as ten injuries on his body as a result of the assault made by the petitioner. The petitioner who was armed with a knife had taken the deceased on the pretext of smoking cigarette and thereafter had stabbed him with the said knife. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner had no intention to commit the murder of the deceased or that the incident in question had taken place in a spur of moment. 7. CW13 and CW14 are the alleged witnesses to the incident in question. Both of them have clearly stated that they had seen the petitioner assaulting the deceased with the knife, which was subsequently recovered at the instance of the petitioner.
CW13, after seeing the petitioner committing the crime had immediately informed the first informant, who was in search of his son and on receipt of
- 6 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13028 CRL.P No. 102755 of 2025
such information, the first informant and his son had gone to the spot of crime at about 09:00 a.m. and had found the dead body of the deceased, which had multiple stab injuries. The first information is filed at about 12:00 a.m. on 30.11.2024 and the incident in question had taken place at about 09:00 a.m. Having regard to the aforesaid aspects of the matter, more so in the background, in which the incident in question had taken place for which there are two eyewitnesses, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail at this stage cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE
VNP / CT: BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 23