NAVIN v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION, NOW REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580011. (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, GRANT BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IN SC NO.173/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD (CRIME NO.95/2019 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 120-B AND 302 R/W 34 OF IPC, BY THE RESPONDENT DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION). - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

#1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.95/2019 of respondent- police for the offence under Sections 120-B, 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

#2. Brief facts of the case: The case of the prosecution is that on 27.07.2019, a missing complaint came be registered by complainant stating that his brother deceased - Nagaraj was found missing since 26.07.2019 and the said compliant was registered by the respondent police in crime 94/2019 against unknown person. On 29.07.2019 at about 10.00 pm the body of deceased was found behind KUD (Karnataka University, Dharward) ladies hostel, Dharwad. Thereafter, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant alleging that his brother namely Nagaraj was doing small - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR money lending business and his schoolmate accused No.1 had taken hand loan of Rs.1 lakh for the marriage of his sister on the condition that he would repay the said amount at the earliest. However, accused No.1 failed to repay the said hand loan to the deceased. In that regard, there is dispute between the brother and the borrower. It is further stated that a notarized agreement was executed by accused No.1 that he would repay the amount within one month. Inspite of that the deceased used to harass accused No.1 and even, the deceased went to the house at Mugad village and abused his mother and pregnant sister of accused No.1. As such accused No.1 was very angry on deceased Nagaraj. Keeping in mind the enmity, on 25.07.2019 accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 and 3 hatched a plan to eliminate deceased Nagaraj and called him on 26.07.2019 behind KUD (Karnataka University, Dharwad) ladies hostel in the Eucalypts plantation, made him consume alcohol and thereafter, they committed murder of the deceased. The respondent police after securing the presence of petitioner - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR and others completed the investigation and submitted the charge sheet. The matter is pending for evidence.

#3. The petitioner is arranged as accused No.2 as per the order sheet, he remained absent on three occasions starting from 18.10.2021 to 31.07.2024. In the meantime, the trial Court has not only issued NBW, but also issued notice to the surety. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking regular bail. In fact the petitioner was on bail by this Court.

#4. Heard Sri Sirnand Pachchapure, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Praveen Y. Devareddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.

#5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that due to lack of communication between the counsel and the petitioner, he could not get the accurate information regarding the hearing date before the trial Court, therefore, he remained absent. However, the said - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR absence was not an intentional, but it is bonafide. The petitioner is permanent resident of Dharwad and he was working as a coolie and he will abide the condition imposed by this Court in the event of release on bail. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition.

#6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State vehemently submitted that the petitioner has misused the liberty granted to him and he has hampered the proceedings of the Court. The respondent police have secured the petitioner after the bail of the petitioner was cancelled. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of absconding again. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail, making such submissions, the learned HCGP for respondent - State prays to reject the petition.

#7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the order sheet available on record, it appears from the record that accused No.2 was - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR present on several occasions, however, due miscommunication between the counsel and the petitioner, the petitioner is stated to have remained absent. Moreover, the petitioner was on bail.

#8. Having considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: i. ii. ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.95/2019 of respondent-police for the offence under Sections 120-B, 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC. iii. The petitioner shall mark attendance before respondent police once in 15 days between 10.00 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17399 CRL.P No. 104622 of 2025 HC-KAR am to 2.00 p.m., on Saturday, till disposable of the case. iv. v. The petitioner shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates, without fail. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE ASN/CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21