- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104899 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHIVAPPA S/O. SIDDAPPA BADIGER AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. PYATI ONI, AT POST. TADAKOD, TQ. DIST. DHARWAD-581105 (NOW IS IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.M. SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR GARAG POLICE STATION, GARAG CIRCLE, DHARWAD, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 483 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO ORDER THE RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED ON BAIL, IN SESSION CASE NO. 39/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302, 201 OF IPC, ARISING OUT OF GARAG P.S. CRIME NO.248/2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IVTH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DHARWAD, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. Date: 2026.01.12 16:26:01 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.K.M.Shiralli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.N.Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. Facts of the case which are utmost necessary for disposal of the petition are as under: 2.1. Smt.Roopa Devaravar lodged a complaint with Garag Police Station in Crime No.248/2023 on 24.12.2023 for the offences punishable under Section 201 and Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. 2.2. Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that Sri.Suresh being the husband of the complainant, had lent a sum of Rs.60,000/- to the petitioner. There was no repayment of the said sum of Rs.60,000/- despite repeated demands. In that regard, there was an ill will developed between the petitioner and deceased - Sri.Suresh. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 2.3. When the matter stood thus, on 21.12.2023 at about 03.00 p.m., there was a quarrel in the tea shop situated in front of Panchayath Office of Thadakoda and after the quarrel, sum of Rs.30,000/- was repaid by the petitioner to the deceased. 2.4. On 24.12.2023 at about 06.30 p.m., deceased intimated the complainant that he would be visiting Amminbhavi along with the accused and went on a motorcycle. At about 08.00 p.m., near Uppinabetagiri, near the land of Toggi on Harobelavadi Road, the petitioner said to have assaulted the deceased on his head with iron rod and in order to make it an accident, ran away from the spot. 2.5. A stranger intimated the incident to the complainant and thereafter complaint came to be lodged. 2.6. Police after thorough investigation, filed charge sheet against the petitioner. 3. Complainant is the last seen witness who had witnessed the accused proceeding from the house of the deceased on a motorcycle accompanied by the accused, whose - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 statement has been recorded before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that accused is in custody on and from 26.12.2023 and except the voluntary statement, there is no other material on record and as such, continuation of the accused in judicial custody is no longer warranted. 5. He would also contend that there is a material contradiction in the statement recorded by the police and the statement offered before the learned Trial Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. that of the complainant. Therefore, the case of the prosecution cannot be believed so as to disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail and thus, sought for allowing the petition. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader objects the bail grounds by contending that the fact of taking loan in a sum of Rs.60,000/- and return of loan in a sum of Rs.30,000/- pursuant to the quarrel that took place two days earlier to the incident is found from the records. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 7. Admittedly, accused and deceased proceeded on a motorcycle on 24.12.2023 at about 06.30 p.m. stating that they are proceeding towards Amminbhavi. 8. In other words, complainant is the last seen witness who is yet to be examined in the matter. 9. He would further contend that her statement before the learned Trial Magistrate recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. would make it clear that she had been intimated by somebody that her husband is done to death. 10. He would also contend that motive for the incident is the enmity between the deceased and the accused and therefore, sought for dismissal of the bail petition. 11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 12. On such perusal of material on record, it is crystal clear that there was a loan transaction between the deceased and the petitioner. There was an altercation on 21.12.2023 in a tea shop, situated in front of the Tadakoda Panchayat Office. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 After the altercation, sum of Rs.30,000/- was repaid by the petitioner to the deceased. 13. However, on 24.12.2023, again deceased and petitioner went on a motorcycle intimating the complainant that they would be proceeding towards Amminabhavi. 14. No doubt, the case of the prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence. 15. The complainant is the last seen witness in the case on hand. 16. Charge sheet materials would also establish that the prosecution has invoked offence under Section 201 of Indian Penal Code. 17. Whether at all the petitioner has assaulted the deceased on the head with an iron rod when the deceased was picking the notes, which had fallen on the road said to have been thrown by the accused and in the process, whether the accused has assaulted the complainant on head of deceased in the night hours around 08.00 p.m. on 24.12.2023 is to be decided by the learned Trial Judge by recording the evidence of the parties. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 18. The motive being the enmity with regard to part non- payment of the hand loan and last seen witness being the complainant and there is a recovery of iron rod pursuant to the voluntary statement given by the accused, this Court is of the considered opinion that the material on record at this stage would definitely disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order of bail by resorting to the powers vested in this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 19. It is always open for the petitioner to approach this Court with a successive bail request if there is a positive changed circumstance in this case. 20. Expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, at this stage, would definitely hamper the rights of the parties during the trial one way or the other. 21. Thus, desisting from holding a mini trial, this Court is of the concerned opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are hardly sufficient to grant bail to the petitioner. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:104 CRL.P No. 104899 of 2025 22. In view of foregoing discussion following: ORDER Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 25