- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102213 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: BASARAKODU PAKKIR SWAMI @ BASARAKODU PAKKIRASWAMY @ FAKKIRASWAMY S/O. PAKKIRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O. CHILUGODU VILLAGE, H. B. HALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, THROUGH TAMBARAHALLI POLICE STATION, H. B. HALLI TALUKA, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED BY GRANTING REGULAR BAIL IN S.C.NO.5104/2024 (CRIME NO.57/2024 OF TAMBRAHALLI POLICE STATION) ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI, SITTING AT HOSAPETE, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(1) AND 352 OF B.N.S., IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Kirtilata Patil, learned HCGP for the respondent – State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) to enlarge him on bail in S.C. No.5104/2024 (Crime No.57/2024 of Tambrahalli Police Station, Vijayanagara District), on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, sitting at Hospete for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: The complainant – CW1 lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner and his wife are resident of Chilugodu - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 village, H.B.Halli Taluk. The accused suspected fidelity of his wife Lakshmidevi – CW21 and suspected his brother Anandalli Basavaraj is having illicit affair with his wife. Thus, he developed vengeance against the deceased and intended to commit his murder. 4. On 12.10.2024 at about 01:00 p.m., the accused came on his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-35/X-5007 with axe in order to commit murder of the deceased Basavaraj, proceeded towards bus stop of Chilugodu village, where he had parked his motorcycle on the said place and took axe, when the deceased Basavaraj was standing near the statue of Veerayodha Mounesh at Chilugodu village, the accused abused the deceased in filthy language and assaulted him with axe at the front of his neck, backside of the neck and left side and backside of the head. Thereby caused injuries to him which leading to his death. Therefore, the first informant lodged a complaint to the respondent – Police which led to registration of an FIR and initiation of investigation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 5. During the course of investigation, the petitioner – accused was arrested and in-turn he was remanded to judicial custody on 13.10.2024. Hence, this petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire case of the prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence, and the prosecution has not produced any iota of evidence to show that the petitioner has committed murder of deceased. The entire case of the prosecution, even if it exists, would not fall within the definition of murder, as is alleged. If the entire contents of the complaint and the charge sheet averments are taken into consideration, the case may fall within the definition of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, since there was no intention or mens-rea to commit offence. Hence, there is no prima facie case to invoke provision under Section 103(1) of the BNSS. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 7. It is contended that, except CW.14-an eye- witnesses to the incident and CW.21 who is wife of petitioner, there are no other material to connect this petitioner to the crime. Petitioner is the only bread earner in the family. If his custody is continued, entire family will face hardship. Now, the investigation is completed and Investigating Officer has filed a charge sheet and the case is committed to the Court of Sessions for trial, the trial of the criminal cases would take considerable time. Hence, learned counsel for petitioner prayed for grant of bail. 8. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State contended that there is prima facie case against the petitioner and he is involved in the heinous offence punishable under Section 103(2) of the BNSS. It is contended that an eyewitnesses have seen the incident and there was intention on the part of the petitioner, who came to the scene of occurrence with preparation and he was carried an axe in his motorcycle and he took a quarrel with deceased, abused him in filthy language, and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 assaulted him with the axe on the vital parts of the body. As a result, he succumbed to the injuries on the spot. If he is released on bail, he may tamper the prosecution witnesses and hamper the trial. Hence, he prayed for rejection of the petition. 9. Perusal of the materials on record. 10. As per the charge sheet materials, it appears that deceased had an illicit relationship with the wife of accused i.e., CW.21-Laxmidevi. Hence, the petitioner developed vengeance against the deceased and decided to eliminate him. Accordingly, on 12.10.2024 at about 1.20 p.m., in the bus-stop of Chilugodu village, the petitioner assaulted deceased with an axe and caused severe injuries. Hence, the deceased died on the spot itself. 11. As per the charge sheet materials, the first informant, who is none other than the brother of deceased, has witnessed the incident and CW.14 is an eye witness to the incident and has seen the occurrence. Both - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 have stated against the petitioner and his involvement in the case. 12. As per the post mortem report, the deceased sustained in all five injuries. It indicates that the petitioner caused injuries with an axe on the vital parts of the body i.e., neck and head. Further, the investigating officer has recovered the axe at the instance of accused under seizure panchnama. It shows that petitioner is involved in the offence and there is prima facie material against him. 13. Contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire case of the prosecution, even if it exists would not fall within the definition of murder and that the case may be fall within the definition of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In order to ascertain these aspects, a full-fledged trial is required. At this juncture, it is too premature to arrive at such a conclusion. Hence, there is no merit in the petition. Accordingly I proceed to pass the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8817 CRL.P No. 102213 of 2025 ORDER The criminal petition is dismissed. Note: The observation made in this petition is only for the purpose of disposal of this petition and the trial Court shall not be influenced by observations made in this order. It is made clear that petitioner may apply for bail, before the trial Court, soon after examination of material witnesses i.e., CW1 and other eye witnesses in this case. In that eventuality, the trial Court may dispose such application, in accordance with law. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RSH & AC /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25