- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104437 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: BHIMAPPA MANG @ MADAR S/O. MUTTAPPA MANG @ MADAR AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, R/O. MUTTUR, TQ. JAMAKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARANABASAVARAJ C., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD 581100, THROUGH JAMAKHANDI RURAL POLICE STATION BAGALKOT DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON REGULAR BAIL IN S.C. NO. 5035/2025 ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOT TO SIT AT JAMAKHANDI, AT JAMAKHANDI IN CRIME NO. 05/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 103(1) AND 332(C) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA-2023 REGISTERED BY THE JAMAKHANDI RURAL POLICE STATION, JAMAKHANDI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri. Sharanabasavaraj C., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. P.N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioner who is accused in S.C. No.5035/2025, seeking for grant of regular bail, under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. Facts in nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under: 3.1. Jamakhandi Rural Police registered a case in Crime No.5/2025 for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3.2. In the complaint, it is alleged that in Muttur Village on 07.01.2025 in the house of complainant at about 08.00 a.m., accused being enraged with the black magic - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 said to have been committed by Shobha by throwing the lemon in front of his house, nurtured enmity against her and trespassed into her house and assaulted her with a wooden club on her head and neck. Resultantly, Shobha lost her life. 4. After registering the case, police have thoroughly investigated the matter inter alia recording the statements of four eyewitnesses vide CW11 to 14 namely Pulabai, Sadashiv, Raju Mang and Muttappa. 5. The Post mortem report would indicate that the death is due to the head injury. Since, the petitioner is a known person and eye witnesses did not nurture any previous enmity, request for the bail by the accused was turn down by the learned District Judge. 6. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition would contend that even if the entire allegations in the complaint and Column No.17 of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 charge sheet, are taken into consideration, the incident cannot be termed as a murder. 8. At the most it can be scaled down to homicidal death not amounting to murder. As such, gravity of the offence is reduced to considerable extent so as to accept the request for grant of bail by the petitioner. 9. He would also contend that assuming for the sake of arguments that prosecution case is true there is a strong reason for the assault inasmuch as the deceased was indulged in black magic and throwing the lemons used in the black magic in front of the house of the accused which ultimately resulted in the unfortunate incident on the fateful day. 10. Therefore, no intentions could be attributed to the accused for sudden death of Shobha. Thus, he sought for grant of bail. 11. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State would indicate that it is settled - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 principles of law that at the time of considering the bail application there cannot be any mini trial. 12. He would further contend that wooden club is a deadly weapon and body part of victim chosen by the petitioner for assault is the head. Therefore, there was every intention to take away the life of Shobha. Therefore, the argument put forth on behalf of the petitioner that incident is a case of homicidal death not amounting to murder, cannot be accepted at least till the examination of the eye witnesses are completed. 13. He would further contend that, taking note of the nature and character of the accused, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is a every possibility that he would tampering the prosecution witnesses and thus, sought for rejection of the petition. 14. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 15. On such perusal of the material on record, as could be seen from the charge sheet materials, there are four eye witnesses to the incident. 16. Apprehension expressed by the prosecution that there may be tampering of the prosecution witnesses is well founded having regard to the nature and character of the accused. 17. The finding recorded in post mortem report prima facie revealed that the injuries caused by the deceased are because of the blow of accused with the help of wooden club. 18. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, as rightly argued by the prosecution, this Court cannot hold a mini trial to find out whether there was an intention of the petitioner to take away the life of the deceased or not, at least at this stage. 19. Therefore, reserving liberty for the petitioner to renew his request for grant of bail after the material - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:852 CRL.P No. 104437 of 2025 witnesses are examined and if there is a positive changed circumstance in his case, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is rejected. (ii) Any observations made by this Court during the course of this Order, shall not affect the rights of the accused in the pending trial. (iii) Taking note of the fact that the accused is in judicial custody, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM/Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 2