Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200858 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS) BETWEEN: MANAPPA S/O SAYABANNA AMBOLKAR ALIAS AMBLAURA, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER, R/O: HUNASAGI, TQ: HUNASAGI, DIST: YADGIRI - 585215. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SALOMON ALFRED, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ADDL. SPP OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH AT KALABURAGI - 585107
Digitally signed (BY HUNISIGI POLICE STATION). by LUCYGRACE …RESPONDENT Location: HIGH (BY SRI SHESHADRI JAI SHANKAR .M, AGA) COURT OF KARNATAKA THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS-2023, PRAYING TO GRANT THE BAIL TO THE ACCUSED/ PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.102/2024 U/SEC 103,(1), 238, 3(5) OF HUNASAGI PS YADGIR IN SC NO.54/2025 PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT YADGIRI. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF -2-
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) This petition is filed by accused No.2 seeking Regular
Bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 in Crime No.102/2024 of Hunasagi Police Station, though stated as Kodekal Police Station in the order passed by the learned District Judge, but in fact the crime is registered by Hunasagi Police Station, now pending on the file of learned District and Sessions Judge, Yadigiri in SC No.24/2025 for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 238 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
2. The brief facts of the case borne out from the
complaint dated 09.09.2024 are that, some work of laying stone slabs in the kitchen of one Syed S/o AhmadaSab Raichur was entrusted to accused No.1 - Yallappa S/o Hanamanthry Palleda. Subsequently, the same was entrusted to the brother of the complainant by name Sharu, which has resulted in enmity between Yallappa and Sharu as per the allegations of the complainant alleged to -3- have been disclosed by Sharu to the complainant and his other family members.
3. On 09.09.2024, it is alleged that, at about
10.00 A.M., near the bus stand of their village, one Raja sab S/o Hussain Sab disclosed that on 12.08.2024 at about 10.30 P.M., he had seen his brother, accused No.1 and the petitioner were quarreling with each other. Thereafter, he went by the side of the road and after an hour, the said Rajasab and his friend Mohammad Shah witnessed only accused No.1 and the petitioner came
back. On the said information, the complainant who earlier registered an UDR No.10/2024, stating that he had given a compliant on 16.08.2024, that his brother fell in Hunasagi Hirehalla (stream) and died. However, he has expressed the suspicion regarding unnatural death of his brother in the said complaint. After disclosure by the said Rajasab and Mohammad Shah that they have seen the deceased Sharu with the petitioner and accused No.1
on 12.08.2024 - the date on which the deceased disappeared, accordingly, he lodged a complaint on 09.09.2024 against accused No.1 - Yallappa Palleda and the petitioner herein alleging as under: “ಕಾರಣ ನಮ್ಮ ತಮ್ಮನಾದ TH ತಂದೆ SHAWL) = ರಾಯಚೂರ ವ:26 ವರ್ಷ ಉ.ಸೆಂಟಿಂಗ ಕೆಲಸ ಸಾ:ಹುಣಸಗಿ ಈತನಿಗೆ ತೋಹಿದ್ ತಂದೆ ಮಹ್ಮದಸಾಬ ಮುಲ್ಲಾ ಇವರ ಮನೆಯ ಕಿಚನ್ ರೂಮಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬಂಡಿ ಹಾಕುವ ಕೆಲಸವನ್ನು ಯಲ್ಲಪ್ಪ ಪಲ್ಲೇದ ಈತನಿಂದ ಬಿಡಿಸಿ ನನ್ನ ತಮ್ಮ ಶಾರುಗೆ ಕೊಟ್ಟಿದ್ದರಿಂದ ಕೆಲಸದ ವಿಷಯದಲ್ಲಿ BMY ಬೆಳಿಸಿಕೊ೦ಡ ಯಲ್ಲಪ್ಪ ತಂದೆ ಹಣಮಂತ್ರಾಯ DICT ಮತ್ತು ಮಾನಪ್ಪ ತಂದೆ ದೇವಿಂದಫ್ರ ಅಂಬಳೂರ ಇಬ್ಬರೂ ಕೂಡಿ ದಿನಾ೦ಕ:12/08/2024 ರಂದು ರಾತ್ರಿ ವೇಳೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹುಣಸಗಿ ಬಸ್ ನಿಲ್ದಾಣದ ಹಿಂದೆ ಹರಿಯು ದೊಡ್ಡ ಹಳ್ಳದ ದಂಡೆಗೆ ಕರೆದುಕೊ೦ಡು ಹೋಗಿ ಯಾವದೋ ಆಯುಧದಿಂದ ಹೊಡೆದು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡಿ, ಮಾಡಿದ ಕೊಲೆಯನ್ನು ಮುಜ್ಚೆ ಹಾಕಿ We ನಾಶಪಡಿಸುವ ಉದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ಹಳ್ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ನೀರಿನಲಿ ಬಿಸಾಕಿದ ಯಲ್ಲಪ್ಪ ಮತ್ತು DONT ಇವರ ಮೇಲೆ ಕಾನೂರು ರೀತಿ ಕ್ರಮ ಜರುಗಿಸಬೇಕೆಂದು ವಿನಂತಿ.
4. Accordingly, the WHunasagi police registered
Crime No.102/2024 for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 238 read Section 79 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The police have completed the investigation, filed the charge sheet for the offences supra.
5. Heard Sri Saloman Alfred, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Sheshadri Jaishankar, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the respondent - State. -5-
6. The only point which arises for consideration is
“whether in the facts and circumstances of the case on prima facie material, the petitioner be admitted on bail?” It is the contention of Sri Saloman Alfred that earlier a UDR came to be registered by the complainant on 16.08.2024 alleging that his brother fell in Hunasagi
Hirehalla (stream). However, nearly after a span of one month on the basis of some statements of villagers by name Rajasab and Mohammad Shah that they have seen the deceased in the company of accused No.1 and the petitioner on 12.08.2024, which was the last date when the deceased was found alive, crime No.102/2024 came to be registered against accused No.1 and the petitioner for the alleged offences supra. He further submits that there is a considerable delay in lodging the complaint from the first date of incident, as there is no explanation as to why there is disclosure after nearly one month of the incident, though the body of Sharu which was found floating in the
Halla supra on 16.08.2024. That apart, the allegation is -6- against accused No.1 as the contract of laying stone slabs earlier granted to accused No.1 was cancelled and subsequently had been given to deceased Sharu. The only allegation is that accused No.2 was with accused No.1 and there are no allegations except a quarrel between all the three which is alleged to have been witnessed by said Rajasab and Mohammad Shah on 12.08.2024.
7. Per contra, Sri Sheshadri Jaishankar, learned
AGA vehemently opposed the contention of the petitioner stating that, the petitioner was seen lastly with the deceased and thereafter, deceased was vanished and found dead on 16.08.2024 in decomposed condition. The statement made by Rajasab and Mohammad Shah clearly indicates that something has happened between 12.08.2024 and 16.08.2024, which has to come out in the trial. Though the charge sheet is filed, that cannot be a sole ground to say that the petitioner is entitled for bail, the offences alleged are heinous in nature and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is a possibility of -7- tampering and hampering the witnesses and absconding causing delay in trial and accordingly, he prays to reject the bail.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and by pursuing the materials it is found that, there is a considerable delay from 16.08.2024 till 09.09.2024 - the day on which crime was registered against the petitioner
and accused No.1. From the records there is nothing forthcoming that, what was the reason for the said Rajasab and Mohammad Shah not disclosing the fact at the earliest point of time. The opinion on PM report dated 30.11.2024 issued by the Medical Officer, Surapura Taluk, Yadigiri District, on record clearly shows that the cause of death cannot be said due to the highly decomposed state of body.
9. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that holding the petitioner in judicial custody further not warranted. Accordingly, he is admitted on bail. -8- So far as the apprehensions expressed by learned AGA will be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions.
10. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS is hereby allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.102/2024 of Hunasagi Police Station, now pending in SC No.24/2025, on the file of District and Session Judge, Yadigiri, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 subject to the following conditions:
a) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court -9-
without causing any delay in the proceedings. c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences. e) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigation Officer for any further investigation, if needed. f) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission. If any of the above conditions are violated,
prosecution will be entitled to seek cancellation of bail. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE THM,SVH/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4 CT: PS