- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104660 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. NAVEEN S/O. MUSHAPPAGOWDA MULKIGOWDAR, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. PLOT NO.7, JAYANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VANTI MAHAMMAD SHARIF LATIF, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY PSI VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN SC NO.70/2018, CR NO.35/2018 VIDYANAGAR PS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 302, 201, 120(B), 149 OF IPC AND ETC.,. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner – accused No.1 is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.35/2018 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 201, 120(B), 149 of Indian Penal Code (for, brevity, ‘IPC’). Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the younger brother of accused No.5. The deceased Babu Hundekar was the husband of accused No.5. It is alleged that the decased was having illicit relationship with para- medical staff working in the hospital. The deceased had invested money in business with the petitioner and he was insisting to return the said money. Being enraged by the said act of the deceased, the petitioner along with accused No.5 conspired to commit murder of the deceased. In executing the such conspiracy, on 12.03.2018 at about 12.00 noon, accused Nos. 2 to 4 were stated to have - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 committed murder of the deceased. The accused Nos. 1 to 4 burnt the dead body near the land of C.W.61. Therefore, a case came to be registered by Sri. Basappa son of Ramalingappa Hundekar, who is the father of the deceased. 3. Based on the complaint, the respondent police have registered a case in Cr.No.35/2018 against the accused persons. After conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet. 4. Heard Sri. Vanti Mahammad Sharif Latif, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Praveen Y. Devareddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire case is based on the circumstantial evidence. The petitioner and his mother are not feeling well. In fact, the mother of the petitioner is suffering from cancer. No specific overt-act is attributed against the petitioner in committing the murder of the deceased. The entire story has been narrated in the complaint as well as - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 charge sheet which is based on the statement of hearsay and the interested witnesses. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State vehemently submitted that the petitioner had approached this Court for five times in filing similar petitions for grant of bail in Crl.P.Nos.102337/2018, 100528/2020, 101329/2021, 100121/2024 and 101648/2025. On three occasions, this Court has rejected the bail petition not only on merits, but also on health grounds. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, learned HCGP prays to reject the petition. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the reasons assigned in rejecting the bail petitions of the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner had made available some medical reports relating - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 to his mother who is aged about 67 years. On perusal of those reports, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail with certain conditions only in order to take care of his old aged mother for limited period, that would take care of not only the apprehension of the prosecution, but also requirements of the aged mother of the petitioner. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed in part. (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail for a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order in Crime No.35/2018 of respondent-police 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. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18431 CRL.P No. 104660 of 2025 (iii) The petitioner shall surrender before the trial Court after expiry of six months. (iv) The Trial Court is directed to remand him to the judicial custody. (v) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. (vi) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. 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 PJ/CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36