Dismissed¶42

Sunilkumar Alias Binas S/O Bennipaul Dasari v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2025CRL.P/101239/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected - murder case (S.302 IPC with Ss.323, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 IPC); Crime No.88/2018, Bendigeri Police Station, Hubballi; S.C.No.79/2019, I-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad at Hubballi; deceased intervener Ramesh Harapanal; eyewitnesses supported prosecution; custody since 02.12.2018; trial directed to conclude before 30.06.2025; Justice V. Srishananda; Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail refused; learned trial judge directed to conclude the trial on or before 30.06.2025. ¶42

Sunilkumar Alias Binas S/O Bennipaul Dasari… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:5775 CRL.P No. 101239 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101239 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SUNILKUMAR @ BINAS S/O. BENNIPAUL DASARI AGE: 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER, R/A. H. NO.102, 2^ND CROSS, AMBEDKAR COLONY, MANTOOR ROAD, TALUK: HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580020.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI AVINASH M. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BENDIGERI POLICE STATION, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

Digitally signed by V V N N BADIGER BADIGER Date:2025.04.03 10:53:26 +0530

¶16

(BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.0088/2018 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT BENDIGERI POLICE STATION HUBBALLI, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324, 307, 302, 504, 506 R/W. 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I-ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI, IN S.C. NO.79/2019.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:5775 CRL.P No. 101239 of 2025

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

¶23

Heard Sri.Avinash M. Angadi, learned counsel

¶24

for the petitioner and Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

¶25

Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. with

¶26

the following prayer:

¶27

“To allow this petition and enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on regular bail in Crime No.0088/2018 registered by the Respondent Bendigeri Police Station Hubballi, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 302, 504, 506 R/W. 34 of IPC, pending on the file of I-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi, in S.C.No.79/2019.”

¶28

Facts in a nutshell for disposal of the revision

¶29

petition are as under:

¶30

A complaint came to be lodged with Bendigeri Police Stated which was registered in Crime No.88/2018 on 29.11.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 302, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the IPC’). Complainant-

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5775 CRL.P No. 101239 of 2025

¶32

Denzil Srinivasulu Valimi, contended that on 28.11.2018 between the period of 8.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m., there was an altercation behind Holy Church in Mantur Road, Krupa Nagar, Hubbali, wherein accused persons said to have assaulted the complainant and others.

¶33

Registering the case, noting the fact that death of Ramesh Harapanal who had intervened in the altercation to pacify the incident, Police invoked Section 302 of the IPC. After thorough investigation, charges came to be filed. Petitioner and others were secured and charges came to be framed. Since accused persons pleaded not guilty and trial was held.

¶34

Complaint and other material witnesses have examined before the trial Court and trial is at the crucial stage. Complainant and other witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution in toto . Material on record would indicate that eye witnesses seeing the assault made to Ramesh Harapanal, ultimately resulted in death of said Ramesh Harapanal, who had intervened in the altercation

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5775 CRL.P No. 101239 of 2025

¶36

to pacify the same and got severely injured and ultimately died.

¶37

Taking note of these aspects of the matter, especially the overtact attributable to the present petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶38