- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7131 OF 2025 BETWEEN: IMRAN S/O NAWAZ KHAN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NEAR ANVI MASJID, PATHODY ROAD, NEAR POST OFFICE, UPPALA, KASARAGOD, KERALA-671 121. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TALHA ISMAIL BENGRE, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MANGALORE SOUTH POLICE STATION, DAKSHINA KANNADA, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THIS PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.2) HEREIN ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.197/2024, MANGALORE SOUTH POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) OF BNS WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MANGALORE. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner/accused No.2 has preferred this petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 to enlarge him on bail in Cr.No.197/2024 of Mangalore South Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Chargesheet is filed against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 103(1), 61(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. 4. On 14.10.2024, a dead body was found lying near Indira Canteen situated at service Bus Station, Mangaluru City. UDR No.80/2024 was registered under Section 194(3) of BNSS, 2023. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 5. On 22.10.2024, Smt.Prameela, sister of the deceased lodged a complaint with Mangaluru South Police alleging accused Nos.1 and 2 have committed the murder of her brother Rajesh Gowda. In her complaint, she has stated that one Abdul Rahman saw both the accused assaulting her brother and committing his murder. 6. It is the case of prosecution that the accused had a financial dispute with the deceased and on the date of incident i.e., on 14.10.2024 at about 3.00 p.m., both the accused conspired to commit his murder and came near service bus stand at about 4.00 p.m, wherein, the deceased was present. They abused him and assaulted with stone on his face, ears and accused No.1 strangulated him. 7. It is the contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He contended that the incident according to prosecution took place on 14.10.2024 and if Abdul Rehman – CW.2, had seen the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 incident, he would not have kept quite till 22.10.2024. He contended that the said information allegedly given by CW.2 is after an inordinate delay of 8 days and no explanation is forthcoming for the said delay. 8. Learned counsel further contended that as per prosecution, CCTV clipping was collected from the spot, wherein the petitioner was seen present at the place of incident. However, as per FSL report, the facial feature was not properly visible and therefore, it cannot be said that it was the petitioner who was present at the place of incident, as alleged by the prosecution. 9. The learned counsel contended that the petitioner is arrested and interrogated, he is in judicial custody from 24.10.2024 and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing any conditions. 10. Learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand has opposed the prayer for bail contending that CW.2 is a star witness who has seen both the accused - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 assaulting and committing the murder of Abdul Rehman and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may threaten the said witness and thereby hamper the case of prosecution. He submits that a blood stained T-shirt has been recovered from the petitioner and he is a habitual offender involved in other criminal cases. He has accordingly sought to dismiss the petition. 11. It is true that initially a UDR was registered naming unknown persons as the culprit. However, according to prosecution CW.2 – Abdul Rehman is an eyewitness to the incident, who informed about the incident to the sister of CW.4 – Ajmeer. The FIR came to be registered against accused Nos.1 and 2 on 22.10.2024. Merely because there is delay in the eyewitness revealing the incident, is not a ground to doubt the veracity of their statements. In his statement, CW.2 has stated that he got scared and thinking that he too will be killed, went away from the spot. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33674 CRL.P No. 7131 of 2025 12. As rightly contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader, CW.2 being a material witness, if petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every chance of threatening the said witness. Hence at this stage, it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Petitioner is permitted to renew his bail application after examination of CW.2. Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE TL,HB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20