- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102716 OF 2025 (439 of Cr.PC/483 of BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. NITIN S/O. SURESH HULWAN, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: AUTO DRIVER, R/O. KANBHAG, JAMADADE GALLI, SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA. 2. PIYUSH S/O. GURADATT KOLI, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC, R/O. RUKMINI NAGAR, KOLHAPUR ROAD, SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA K. KABBUR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH PSI RAIBAG P.S., R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING THE PETITION MAY BE ALLOWED AND THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 AND 7 MAY BE RELEASED ON REGULAR BAIL, IN RAIBAG PS CRIME NO.37/2025, PENDING BEFORE VIITH ADDL. DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, SITTING AT CHIKKODI IN S.C. NO.5067/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 109(1), 61(2)(a) AND 238(a) R/W. 190 OF BNS 2023, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, 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:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. Iranagouda Kabbur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Abhishek Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. 2. The petitioners – accused Nos.4 and 7 have filed this petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) seeking to grant bail in S.C. No.5067/2025 on the file of the learned VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikkodi, for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 109(1), 61(2)(a) and 238(a) read with Section 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: The de facto complainant and accused hail from Miraj. In the year 2017, the de facto complainant and their children along with some other people committed murder of the father of accused No.1. Thereafter, the complainant and his - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 son by name Amir Sheikh were released on bail, but the elder son Sameer Sheikh was not released. Since then, the accused were attempting to assault the complainant. Later Amir Sheik was released by the High Court of Bombay with a condition that he should be externed from Sangli District of Maharashtra till the completion of the investigation. On 01.11.2024, the complainant and their family shifted to Vidyanagar, Raibag of Belagavi district and started living on a rental house. On 28.01.2025, the complainant and elder son was proceeding to attend the Raibag Court. When he was proceeding on his motorcycle on Raibag-Ankali road, the accused persons with an intention to murder of Amir Sheikh, caused an accident. Hence, Amir Sheikh sustained severe injuries and succumbed to death. In this regard, a complaint was lodged. This led to registration of FIR and investigation. During the course of investigation, these petitioners and other were arrested by the respondent – Police and in-turn they were remanded to judicial custody. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent, they have been falsely - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 implicated in this case, there are no overt act alleged against them and nothing is recovered from these petitioners. The only allegation against these petitioners is that they were part of the Syndicate and they were instigating accused Nos.6 and 9 to commit murder of the deceased Sameer Khaja and Firoz Mustaq Rohile. Now the investigation is completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet. These petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that the petitioners are involved in the offence punishable under Section 103 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 302 of IPC). There is prima facie case against the petitioners and if they are released on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and hamper the trial. Thus, considering the nature and gravity of offences, these petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 6. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that there was dispute between the accused and the de facto complainant. Hence, accused Nos.1 and 2 were convicted and they were in judicial custody prior to the registration of the complaint. The charge sheet material discloses that accused No.1 hatched a plan with some other accused persons to eliminate the son of the complainant by name Sameer Khaja (the deceased). On 22.01.2025 Sameer Khaja and Firoz Mustaq Rohile (CW16) were proceeding on their motorcycle on Raibag-Ankali road to attend Raibag Court. At this juncture, accused Nos.6 and 9 being the driver of the swift car and bolero, caused accident of Sameer Khaja and Firoz Mustaq Rohile. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation and filed the charge sheet against the petitioners. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that though the accident was caused, but the Investigating Officer converted the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC to 302 of IPC. In the instant case, except the recovery of the vehicles from accused Nos.6 and 9, nothing has been - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 recovered from accused Nos.4 and 7. The entire allegation is against accused Nos.1, 6 and 9. Accused Nos.6 and 9 who have caused the accident. So far as the allegation against these petitioners – accused Nos.4 and 7 are concerned, they were part of syndicate and they made criminal conspiracy with other persons. 8. Having regard to the material available on record and considering the nature of allegations, gravity of offence, circumstances in which the offence is committed, position and status of the petitioners with reference to the victim and witness, likelihood of fleeing away from justice, of repeating same offences by the appellant, of tampering with witness, character and antecedents of the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER [i] The criminal petition is allowed. [ii] The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail on they executing personal bonds in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with two sureties (one of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9122 CRL.P No. 102716 of 2025 the surety shall furnish his title deed before the Trial Court) for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. [iii] The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. [iv] The petitioners shall appear before the Court regularly. [v] The petitioners shall not commit any offence during the pendency of the trial, including any offence similar to the one alleged. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail before the appropriate Court in accordance with law. NOTE: The above observation made in this petition is only for the purpose of disposal of this petition. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE Rsh /ct-an List no.: 1 sl no.: 4