- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9694 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. VIJAYA @ VIJI S/O SRI. MAARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O: THIRUMALAPURA VILLAGE, BELLUR HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA ALSO AT: CHINAKURALI VILLAGE AND HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARI PRASAD M.B., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION, SRIRANGAPATNA SUBDIVISION CIRCLE, MANDYA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. NAGESWARAPPA, HCGP) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (U/S 483 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.5010/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT MANDYA (SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATNA), ON THE BASIS OF CHARGE SHEET/FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN CR.NO.0226/2024, PANDAVAPURA PS., FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 103(1) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER This petition is preferred under Section 483 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner/sole accused on bail in S.C.No.5010/2025 pending on the file of the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mandya (sitting at Srirangapatna). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Complaint is lodged by one Alamelu, Mother of deceased by name Aravinda @ Maari. On the basis of her complaint, a case in Crime No.226/2024 was registered at Pandavapura Police Station against the accused/petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS, 2023. 4. On completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023. 5. It is the case of prosecution that deceased Aravinda @ Mari was working as a coolie in a stone quarry in Chinakurali Village, Pandavapura Taluk. He was residing along with his wife in a rented house belonging to one Kumara bin Marankegowda. His wife had been to her native place in Nagamangala Taluk, as she was pregnant. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 Thereafter, accused and CW.2 – Elumalai were residing in the said house, along with the deceased. On 27.10.2024, accused and CW.2 – Elumalai after finishing their work, returned to the house at about 8.00 p.m. At about 9.00 p.m., deceased called the accused to go to Chinakurali Town, however, the accused refused. Hence, deceased alone went out and accused and CW.2 slept in the house. At about 10.00 p.m., deceased returned to the house and called the accused and while having a conversation with him taunted him saying he has illicit relationship with his wife. Being enraged, the accused slapped the deceased. When the deceased fell down, he took a hammer used to break the stone and assaulted him on the left cheek and near left neck and committed his murder. The accused as well as CW.2 then locked the house and while going towards Tirumalapura Village on a motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA 54-Q-8947, accused threw the hammer by the side of the road. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 6. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the only material placed by the prosecution to connect the accused with the Crime is that of the statement of CW.2. It is his contention that the statement of CW.2 cannot be believed since he has not lodged any complaint against the accused, on the other hand, the complaint is lodged by the mother of the deceased. It is his contention that as per prosecution, CW.2 snatched the weapon from the hands of the accused and therefore, the case of prosecution that on the way towards Tirumalapura, accused threw the said weapon and the same was recovered at his instance is not believable. He contended that the statement of CW.2 cannot be believed and apart from the same there is no material against the petitioner. He further contended that the charges are not yet framed, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody from 28.10.2024. He placed reliance on a judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2024) - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 9 SCC 813, to contend that the right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution is a fundamental right and the State or the prosecuting Agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the Crime committed is serious. 7. The learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the prayer seeking bail on the ground that there is a prima facie case against petitioner in view of the statement of CW.2. He contended that there is no delay in trial as contended by the learned counsel for petitioner as the matter is pending before the trial Court for framing of charges. He has accordingly sought to dismiss the petition. 8. According to prosecution, deceased along with accused and CW.2 – Elumalai were residing in a rented house belonging to one Kumar bin Marankegowda in Chinakurali Village. On 27.10.2024, accused along with CW.2 came to the said house at about 8.00 p.m., wherein - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 they had drinks. Deceased called accused to go to Chinakurali Town, but the accused refused and therefore, deceased alone went to Chinakurali Town. At that time accused and CW.2 were present in the house. Further, deceased returned to the house at 10.00 p.m., and called the accused and told him that he has illicit relationship with his wife. The accused, being enraged, slapped the deceased and when the deceased fell down, took a hammer and assaulted on his left cheek and near left neck with force and committed his murder. 9. The statement of CW.2 was recorded on 28.10.2024, the same day of lodging the complaint. A perusal of the statement goes to show that he was very much present in the house when the incident took place. When he enquired, accused made a confession before him that he has committed the murder. Thereafter, accused took a sum of Rs.11,300/- which was in the pant pocket of the deceased and both of them went on the motorcycle of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 the accused towards Tirumalapura. On the way the accused threw the weapon by the side of the road. 10. The Statement of CW.2 cannot be disbelieved at this stage. His statement prima facie shows that the offence is committed by the petitioner. According to him, when he got up from sleep, he saw accused standing with the blood stained hammer in his hand. The weapon was recovered at the instance of the accused. As per Post Mortem Report, as many as 9 injuries are noticed on the dead body. Cause of death is due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of multiple shock and blunt injuries. 11. The accused was arrested on 28.10.2024. On completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed. The case is committed to the Court of Sessions and it is pending in S.C.No.5010/2025 on the file of the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mandya (sitting at Srirangapatna) for hearing before charge. It cannot be said that there is delay in trial. Considering the nature of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28948 CRL.P No. 9694 of 2025 allegations, the incarceration undergone by the petitioner is not a ground to enlarge him on bail. Petition is dismissed. The trial Court is directed to expedite framing of charges and proceed with the trial. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE HB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31