(BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM & Ors. v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS1, the victim(s) or the next of kin & Ors.

(BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. RENSPRE PRITHESH D’SOUZA, ADV., FOR R1 & R2) - - - THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439(2) CR.PC (FILED U/S 483(3) OF BNSS), PRAYING TO CANCEL THE ORDER GRANTING BAIL TO RESPONDENT/ACCUSED VIDE ORDER DATED 05.06.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU IN CR. MISC. NO.442/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 103(2), 115(2), 189(2), 191(1), 191(3), 240 READ WITH SECTION 190 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 IN CR.NO. 37/2025 REGISTERED BY MANGALURU RURAL POLICE & ETC. THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 03.08.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL HC-KAR - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025 CAV ORDER Criminal Petition Nos.16338/2025 and 10339/2025 are filed by the State and the next of kin of the deceased respectively, seeking to cancel the order of bail dated

05.06.2025 passed in Crl. Misc.No.423/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Sessions Court’). Criminal Petition Nos.16367/2025 and 10321/2025 are filed by the State and the next of kin of the deceased respectively, seeking to cancel the order of bail dated

05.06.2025 passed in Crl. Misc.No.442/2025 by Sessions Court. Criminal Petition Nos.16275/2025 and 15550/2025 are filed by the State and the next of kin of the deceased respectively, seeking to cancel the order of bail dated

06.06.2025 passed in Crl. Misc.No.426/2025 passed by the Sessions Court. Criminal Petition No.10314/2025 is filed by the next of kin of the deceased seeking to cancel the order of bail HC-KAR - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025

31.05.2025 Crl. Misc.No.394/2025 Crl. Misc.No.395/2025 passed by the Sessions Court.

#2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as follows: a) The petitioner Crl.P.No.15550/2025, Crl.P.No.10321/2025, Crl.P.No.10314/2025, Crl.P.No.10339/2025 shall be referred to as the ‘next of kin of the deceased’. b) The petitioner Crl.P.No.16367/2025, Crl.P.No.16275/2025 and 16338/2025 shall be referred to as ‘the State’ c) The respondent No.1 in Crl.P.No.15550/2025, Crl.P.No.10321/2025, Crl.P.No.10314/2025, Crl.P.No.10339/2025 and respondents Crl.P.No.16367/2025, Crl.P.No.16275/2025 and 16338/2025 shall be referred to as ‘the accused’.

#3. The brief facts leading to the filing of these petitions are that on 27.04.2025 in a cricket match HC-KAR - 12 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025 organized by the ‘Amazing Friends Konguru, Kulashekara’, the deceased-Ashraf came by raising the slogan ‘Pakistan, Pakistan’. The accused and other people followed the deceased-Ashraf and assaulted him resulting in his death. Subsequently, a complaint was filed by one Sri. Deepak Kumar and the police registered a FIR against the accused and other persons for the offences punishable under Section 103(2), 115(2), 189(2), 190, 191(1), 191(3) and 240 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’). The accused were arrested and were remanded into judicial custody. The accused filed petitions under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the ‘BNSS’) seeking to grant regular bail in Crime No.37/2025. The Sessions Court considered the said petitions and allowed the same. Being aggrieved, the next of kin of the deceased as well as the State have filed these petitions seeking cancellation of bail. HC-KAR - 13 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025

#4. Sri. Clifton D’Rozario, learned counsel appearing for the next of kin of the deceased submits that as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TEHSEEN S POONAWALLA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS1, the victim(s) or the next of kin of the deceased in cases of mob lynching shall be given timely notice of any Court proceedings and the same shall be entitled to be heard at the trial in respect of applications such as bail, discharge, release and parole filed by the accused persons. However, in the instant case, there was no notice to the next of kin of the deceased and the non-issuance of such notice vitiates the order granting bail. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also directed the State Governments to prepare a lynching/mob violence victim compensation scheme and also provide for interim relief to the victim or the next of kin of the victim, however, in the instant case, no scheme for interim compensation has been formulated by the State Government. Hence, the 1 (2018) 9 SCC 501 HC-KAR - 14 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025 State Government must be directed to formulate a scheme for interim compensation to the victim or next of kin of the deceased and also for grant of compensation to the next of kin of the deceased in the instant case. It is further submitted that the crimes in which the accused are involved are heinous in nature and hence, the Sessions Court ought not to have granted bail solely on the ground of parity with other co-accused; or on the ground that the name of the accused was not initially found in the FIR but was subsequently implicated during the course of the investigation; or on the ground that the accused did not have any previous antecedents. It is also submitted that in view of the procedural lapse by the Sessions Court, the order granting bail may be set-aside and the accused may be directed to surrender and the Sessions Court may be further directed to re-consider the bail application on merits after giving an opportunity to the next of kin of the victim to file his objections. In support of his contentions, HC-KAR - 15 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025 he places reliance on the following decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court: a) JAGJEET SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. ASHISH MISHA AND ANOTHER2 b) NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDIAN WOMEN (NFIW) Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS3 c) Y Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER4 d) MANIK MADHUKAR SARVE AND OTHERS Vs. VITTHAL DAMUJI MEHER AND OTHERS5 e) KIRAN @ HOLO MAFATBHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT6 f) SAGAR Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER7 Hence, he seeks to allow the petitions.

#5. Sri.B.N.Jagadeesh, learned State Public Prosecutor-I appearing for the State submits that the Sessions Court has not considered the fact that the crime ORDER (i) The Criminal petitions are dismissed. (ii) The Registrar General/Registrar (Judicial) directed to circulate this order to all the Principal District Judges and the Sessions Judges for mandatory compliance guidelines enumerated in the aforesaid order. (iii) The State Government is directed to formulate a scheme for grant of interim compensation to the victim or the next of kin of the victim within 3 months of passing of this order and compliance report before this Court. (iv) The Registrar (Judicial) shall issue necessary circular to the concerned branches in the High Court with a direction to raise objections, if the victim is not arrayed as a party in cases involving mob violence or lynching. (v) The Principal District Judges shall issue necessary circular to the concerned branches with a HC-KAR - 67 - NC: 2026:KHC:44907 CRL.P No.10339/2025 AND CONNECTED MATTERS CNR: KAHC010469262025 direction to raise objections, if the victim is not arrayed as a party in cases involving mob violence or lynching. (vi) The Sessions Court shall endeavor to complete the trial and pronounce the judgment in a time bound manner as stipulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the TEHSEEN S POONAWALLA referred supra. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1