Sadashiv S/O. Kallappa Uppar Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO GRANT A BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN HUKKERI POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.162/2018 IN SESSION CASE NO.130/2019 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 201, R/W. 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI SIT AT CHIKODI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶19

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

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶25

Heard Sri. Mahentesh S. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. Kirtilata Patil, learned HCGP for the respondent – State.

¶26

This petition is filed by the petitioner – accused No.1 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with S.C. No.130/2019 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikodi, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶27

The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

¶28

On 26.09.2018, the de facto complainant lodged a complaint alleging that he found the corpse of an unknown person in the land of Kiran Shankar Kallatti within the limits of Rakshi village, Hukkeri Taluk. During the course of investigation, it came to light that corpse was that of one

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Ramesh Korennavar and the accused had quarrelled with him for a silly reason and caused head injury with stone and took him in his own Maruti Car, and when he tried to get down from the car, both the accused took him into the sugarcane crop and crushed him with a stone and removed the clothes of the deceased so as to destroy evidence. During the course of investigation, accused No.1 was arrested and in-turn he was remanded to judicial custody. Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge Belagavi granted bail in favour of accused No.1 on 11.01.2019 subject to condition that accused No.1 to pay the bond amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/-.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent, has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. He undertakes to appear before the Court on all dates of hearing and also undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to allow the petition.

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Per contra , learned HCGP contended that there

¶37

are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed the alleged offences and he is a proclaimed offender, as he has absconded. Therefore, he is not entitled to bail. Hence, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

¶38

Perusal of the material on record, it shows that on 11.01.2019, this petitioner – accused No.1 was enlarged on bail by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Criminal Miscellaneous No.3398/2018 subject to execution of personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with a surety for the like sum. However, during subsequent period, accused No.1 remained absent. Later, the Investigating Officer concluded investigation and filed the charge sheet against the accused. Later the petitioner – accused No.1 was arrested, and he was enlarged on bail in Criminal Petition No.100741/2023 and this Court had directed the petitioner –

¶39

accused No.1 to execute a fresh bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Again the petitioner jumped

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

the bail conditions. Hence, the trial Court issued non-bailable warrant and later on 15.08.2024, he voluntarily surrendered before the Trial Court. It shows that it is a case of bail jump inasmuch as the present petitioner was granted bail by the trial Court as well as the Co-ordinate Bench, and on subsequent dates, the accused remained absent. Thus, the trial Court issued non-bailable warrant on 15.08.2024, the petitioner – accused No.1 voluntarily surrendered before the trial Court.

¶43

It is pertinent to note that whenever it is a case

¶44

of jumping of bail by the accused whether there requires an order to be passed by the Court as to the actual bond or not, was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sadananda v. State of Karnataka¹ . Wherein, the Co-ordinate Bench has clearly held that jumping of bail automatically results in forfeiture of the bond and no separate order is necessary as to forfeiture of the bond amount is concerned.

¶45

1 ILR 1985 KAR 2813

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

During the hearing, the learned counsel for the

¶50

petitioner has filed a memo which reads as under:

¶51

“That in the above top noted case, the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.32,000/- bond amount in the criminal petition No.100741/2023 and petitioner is also ready to pay a bond amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before the trial Court.”

¶52

In the above top noted case, the petitioner while granting bail, a bond amount of Rs.50,000/- was ordered as per the order dated 11.01.2019 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.3398/2018 and the petitioner deposited only a sum of Rs.18,000/- and now he is ready to deposit the remaining sum of Rs.32,000/-. Further, the petitioner is ready to deposit the bond amount in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as ordered by the Co-ordinate Bench in Criminal Petition No.100741/2023 and he would also execute a fresh bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and therefore, he would request bail petition be considered in the interest of justice and equity.

¶53

The fact that after jumping bail, the petitioner – accused No.1 has surrendered before the Court. Taking note

¶54

7 -

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

of the contents of the memo, this Court is of the considered opinion that the bail request of the petitioner can be allowed by directing him to pay the bond amount of Rs.1,00,000/and the earlier bond amount of Rs.32,000/-, which was one of the conditions imposed in the earlier bond, amount and the petitioner shall deposit the sum before the Trial Court which is a condition precedent. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

i. The criminal petition is allowed.

¶60

ii. The petitioner shall be released on bail on he executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with a surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶61

iii. The petitioner shall deposit the previous bond amount of Rs.32,000/- [balance amount out of Rs.50,000/-] before the trial Court and the petitioner shall also deposit the previous bond amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before the trial Court, before he is released on bail.

¶62

iv. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶63

8 -

¶64

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8810 CRL.P No. 102067 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

v. It is made clear that, the petitioner shall deposit the earlier bond amount of Rs.32,000/and Rs.1,00,000/- respectively, before the trial Court. After receipt of bond amounts, the trial Court shall issue release intimation to the prison authorities for release of the petitioner.

¶67

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶68

RSH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Sadashiv S/O. Kallappa Uppar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiv S/O. Kallappa Uppar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Bari S/O. Abdul Razak Mulla Vs State of Karnataka

Ajan S/O Malikjan Gadiwale Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Sanju S/O Parasu Karande Vs the State of Karnataka

Praveen S/O Basappa Mudlingannavar Meti Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumarswamy S/O Gangadharayya Hiremath Vs the State of Karnataka

Mehaboobasab S/O Bavasab Hongal Vs the State of Karnataka