Allowed¶¶42

Mahesh S/O Dundappa Meti v. the State of Karnataka

Bail condition – relaxation on ground of poverty

Karnataka HC16 Oct 2025CRL.P/103290/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Relaxation/modification of bail condition; reduction of cash surety from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.50,000/- on account of petitioner's poverty and inability to furnish surety; accused in judicial custody despite bail order; offences under Ss.109, 118(1), 121(1), 132 of BNS 2023 (Hubli Police Station Crime No.212/2024; Sessions Case No.5007/2025, Vth Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Dharwad at Hubballi); petition under S.439(1)(b) Cr.P.C. read with S.483(1)(b) BNSS; High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad; Justice V. Srishananda; decided 16.10.2025; CRL.P No. 103290 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Condition No.2 of the bail order dated 28.04.2025 modified: petitioner to execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with cash surety reduced to Rs.50,000/- (instead of Rs.1,00,000/-). ¶¶42

Mahesh S/O Dundappa Meti Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Condition No.2 of the bail order dated 28.04.2025 modified: petitioner to execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with cash surety reduced to Rs.50,000/- (instead of Rs.1,00,000/-).

¶¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether condition No.2 of the bail order dated 28.04.2025 (personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, one being a cash surety for the likesum) should be relaxed/modified, given that the petitioner, though granted bail, could not comply with it on account of poverty and continues in judicial custody.

¶¶23

Court's answer

Taking note of the petitioner's precarious financial condition and that of his family, and balancing the prosecution's need to secure his presence for trial, ends of justice would be met if condition No.2 is modified by directing the petitioner to execute a bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with cash surety of Rs.50,000/- instead of Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶¶34

Ratio / Principle

Criminal Petition is allowed and condition No.2 of the order dated 28.04.2025 is modified to the above extent.

¶¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail condition — relaxation on ground of poverty — Petition under S.439(1)(b) Cr.P.C. / S.483(1)(b) BNSS seeking modification of condition No.2 of bail order dated 28.04.2025 in Crl.P No.101617/2025, arising out of Hubli Police Station Crime No.212/2024 (offences punishable under Ss.109, 118(1), 121(1) and 132 of BNS, 2023), now Sessions Case No.5007/2025 before the Vth Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad at Hubballi. Though enlarged on bail, the petitioner remained in judicial custody as he could not furnish the cash surety of Rs.1,00,000/- required under condition No.2 owing to poverty. Held, considering his precarious financial condition and the need of the prosecution to secure his presence for trial, ends of justice would be met by modifying condition No.2 — personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- retained, cash surety reduced to Rs.50,000/-. Criminal Petition allowed (V. Srishananda, J., 16.10.2025).

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14055 CRL.P No. 103290 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103290 OF 2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

MAHESH S/O DUNDAPPA METI AGE : 25 YEARS, OCCUP: COOLIE, R/O RAMLINGESHWAR NAGAR, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE-580 030

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI VASANT GANGADHAR HOLEYANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPT. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, P.I. OLD HUBBALLI POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE -580024

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SMT.GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (1)( b) OF CR.P.C (483 (1)(B) OF BNSS), PRAYING TO MODIFY/RELAX/SET ASIDE THE CONDITION NO II IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101617/2025 DATED 28.04.2025 AND CONTINUE THE ORDER OF BAIL GRANTED EARLIER AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN HUBLI POLICE STATION CRIME NO.212/2024 I.E. NOW IN SESSIONS CASE NO.5007/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 109, 118(1), 121(1), 132 OF BNS, 2023, PENDING BEFORE THE VTH

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14055 CRL.P No. 103290 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

Heard Sri Holeyannavar Vasanth Gangadhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Girja Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.

¶23

Petitioner is seeking relaxation of condition No.2 in the order dated 28.04.2025 on the ground that even though the petitioner is having the benefit of the bail, he could not comply the condition No.2 and still continues to be in the Judicial custody.

¶24

Condition No.2 of the order dated 28.04.2025 reads

¶25

as under:

¶26

“The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees one lakhs only] with two sureties of which one surety is cash

¶27

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14055 CRL.P No. 103290 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge.”

¶31

Smt. Girija Hiremath, learned High Court

¶32

Government Pleader on the contrary opposes the relaxation of condition No.2 by contending that the allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature inasmuch as while the petitioner was taken to the spot for conducting the spot inspection in respect of the crime involved in the case, he has manhandled the police and tried to escape away from the clutches of the police. Therefore, there is every possibility of petitioner fleeing away from justice, if condition is relaxed.

¶33

Taking note of the fact that even though the petitioner has benefit of bail order, only on account of poverty, he could not release from the judicial custody.

¶34

Taking note of the said precarious financial condition of the petitioner and his family and also the need of the prosecution in securing the presence of the petitioner for the trial, if the condition No.2 is modified by directing the petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and cash surety to the

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14055 CRL.P No. 103290 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

extent of Rs.50,000/- instead of Rs.1,00,000/- ends of justice

¶39

would be met.

¶40