Dismissed¶64

B Jathappa Alias Kori Jatappa Mahadevappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Mar 2025CRL.P/103811/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 | Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench | V. Srishananda, J. | 11-03-2025 | CRL.P No.103811 of 2024 | Regular bail under S.483 BNSS/S.439 Cr.P.C. refused to accused no.1 in double-murder case (Crime No.64/2023; S.498(A), S.302 r/w S.34 IPC; SC No.5011/2024, 3rd Addl. DSJ Ballari at Hosapete) | Killings of Kaveri and Kotresh on suspicion | Mercy/health grounds rejected | Threat to prosecution witnesses | Renewal possible after examination of material witnesses | Petition rejected.

What did the court decide?

On meticulous perusal of the record, it is crystal clear that two valuable lives (Kotresh and Kaveri) were taken away only on the suspicion entertained by the petitioner and accused no.2. ¶49

B Jathappa Alias Kori Jatappa Mahadevappa Vs… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶64

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner/accused no.1, whose earlier bail requests were rejected, is entitled to be enlarged on regular bail under S. 483 BNSS/S. 439 Cr.P.C. in Crime No.64/2023 (S. 498(A), 302 r/w 34 IPC) pending as SC No.5011/2024. +2 more

¶25

Court's answer

On meticulous perusal of the record, it is crystal clear that two valuable lives (Kotresh and Kaveri) were taken away only on the suspicion entertained by the petitioner and accused no.2.

¶49

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie materials at this stage disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail by resorting to the special powers vested in this Court without holding a mini trial.

¶52

Key takeaways

Taking note of the gravity of the offence, which is a prima factor while deciding the bail request, no case is made out by the petitioner even on the mercy jurisdiction notwithstanding his age and his wife's illness.ratio¶57
In view of the possibility of threat to prosecution witnesses if the petitioner is enlarged, at least at this stage the request cannot be entertained by resorting to the special powers vested in this Court.ratio¶59
It remains open to the petitioner to renew his bail request if there is a positive changed circumstance, especially after the examination of material witnesses.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under S. 483 BNSS, 2023 (S. 439 Cr.P.C.) by B. Jathappa @ Kori Jatappa Mahadevappa (accused no.1, father-in-law of the deceased) for regular bail in Crime No.64/2023 (Chigateri Police Station) for offences under S. 498(A) and S. 302 r/w S. 34 IPC, pending as SC No.5011/2024 before the 3rd Addl. District and Session Judge, Ballari, sitting at Hosapete. Accused no.1 and his son (husband of deceased Kaveri @ Kavya) allegedly assaulted and killed her brother Kotresh on 08.10.2023 and then strangulated Kaveri, staging the scene to suggest an illicit relationship; the State contended the postmortem/FSL showed death by strangulation with no signs of sexual intercourse. Successive bail applications had already been rejected. Holding that two lives were taken merely on suspicion, that prima facie materials disentitled the petitioner from bail without a mini trial, that the gravity of the offence defeated the mercy plea based on his age and his wife's serious illness, and that enlargement risked threats to prosecution witnesses, the Court rejected the petition, reserving liberty to renew it upon a positive changed circumstance, especially after examination of material witnesses.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103811 OF 2024 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

B. JATHAPPA @ KORI JATAPPA MAHADEVAPPA S/O. MAHADEVAPPA, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KESARAHALLI ROAD, CHIGATERI VILLAGE, TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT.RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PSI, CHIGATERI POLICE STATION, CHIGATERI, TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD-580011.

¶14

Digitally signed by V V N N BADIGER BADIGER Date:2025.03.21 10:38:42 +0530

¶15

(BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO ENLARGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.64/2023 FOR OFFENCE U/S. 498(A) AND 302 R/W. 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE CHIGATERI POLICE STATION, TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 3^RD ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, BALLARI, SITTING AT HOSAPETE IN SC NO.5011/2024 IN SO FAR THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

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

¶23

Heard Smt.Reshma Madiwalar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt.Girija S.Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader learned HCGP for respondent-State.

¶24

Petition under Section 483 BNSS/439 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer.

¶25

“Enlarge Petitioner/Accused no.1 on regular bail in Crime No.64/2023 for offence U/s. 498(A) and 302 R/W. 34 of IPC on the file of the Chigateri Police Station, tq. Harapanahalli, Dist. Vijayanagara now pending on the file of the 3^rd Addl. District and Session Judge, Ballari, sitting at Hosapete in SC No.5011/2024 in so far the Petitioner/Accused no.1 is concerned.”

¶26

Bail request by accused No.1-B.Jathappa @ Kori Jatappa which was rejected by the learned Sessions

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶28

Judge even after filing the charge sheet has approached

¶29

this Court with the above prayer in the present petition.

¶30

Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the petition are as under:

¶31

4.1 Smt.Kaveri is the daughter-in-law of the petitioner

¶32

herein. After the marriage, accused No.2 led happy married life for a brief period with deceased Kaveri @ Kavya and in the wedlock, they had a male child which was aged about 7 years as on the date of incident.

¶33

4.2 Accused Nos.1 and 2 being father and son (father-in-law and husband of the deceased) were suspecting the fidelity of Kaveri. On that count there was ill treatment to Kaveri. To set right the differences, the brother of Kaveri came to the house of the petitioner and stayed there. The suspicion with regard to fidelity of Kaveri is now shifted on to brother of the Kaveri and they started ill treating further.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶35

4.3 When the matter stood thus, on 08.10.2023 around 2 a.m. both the accused assaulted the brother of the Kaveri (Kotresh). As a result, Kotresh lost his life. Thereafter, present petitioner and his son accused No.2, dragged Kaveri outside the house and strangulated and killed her.

¶36

4.4 Thereafter, they brought back the dead body of the Kaveri and made her to lie next to the dead body of Kotresh. Petitioner and his son removed the chudidar pant of Kaveri partly to depict that there was illicit relationship between Kaveri and her brother Kotresh, made one of the legs of Kotresh to fall on the dead body of Kaveri near the navel region.

¶37

4.5 After the complaint came to be lodged, Police conducted detailed investigation and based on the material collected, filed charge sheet. Bail request of the petitioner was rejected by Sessions Court as well as by this Court earlier.

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶39

¶40

4.6 After the charge sheet, successive bail request is also rejected by the Sessions Court and thereafter accused No.1 (father-in-law of the deceased Kaveri) has approached this Court.

¶41

Smt.Reshma Madiwalar, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition contend that wife of accused No.1 is suffering from serious ill health and assistance of the present petitioner along the bedside is very much necessary and if not on the merits of the matter, taking note of health condition of wife of accused No.2 and the age of accused No.1 being about 63 years, this Court may enlarge the petitioner on bail with suitable conditions.

¶42

Per contra, Smt.Girija Hiremath, learned HCGP opposed the bail grounds.

¶43

She would further contend that material on record especially the postmortem report of Kaveri would reveal that the death of Kaveri is on account of strangulation resulting in cardio respiratory failure. It is

¶44

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶45

also noticed in the postmortem and the FSL report that there were no signs of sexual intercourse before death of Kaveri.

¶46

Therefore, the attempt made by the petitioners to depict that the death is on account of illicit relationship between Kaveri and Kotresh (brother and sister) prima facie gets extinguished. Therefore, gruesome murder of two persons only on the suspicion is to be taken note of while considering the bail request of the petitioner and sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶47

Having heard the arguments of both sides, this

¶48

court perused the material on record meticulously.

¶49

On such perusal, it is crystal clear that two valuable lives have been taken away only on the suspicion. Pertinent to note that even before Kotresh could come to stay with in the house of Kaveri, there was ill treatment and harassing the Kaveri by the petitioner and his son suspecting the fidelity of Kaveri. Kotresh had visited the house of the petitioner only to set right the differences

¶50

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶51

between accused No.2 and Kaveri but he had to pay very heavy price of loosing his life on account of the suspicion entertained by present petitioner and accused No.2.

¶52

Prima facie materials at this stage thus would definitely disentitle the petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail by resorting to the special powers vested in this Court without holding the mini trial.

¶53

The next limb of argument canvassed on behalf of the petitioner is the ground of mercy.

¶54

Smt.Reshma Madiwalar contended that the

¶55

petitioner is aged 63 years as on today and his wife is seriously ill and his presence by the bedside of the wife of petitioner is very much necessary.

¶56

Taking note of the gravity of the offence which

¶57

is a prima factor while deciding the bail request, this Court is of the considered opinion that case is not made out by the petitioner even on the mercy jurisdiction.

¶58

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4575 CRL.P No. 103811 of 2024

¶59

Further, there is possibility of threat to the prosecution witnesses if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. Therefore, atleast at this stage the request of the petitioner cannot be entertained by resorting the special powers vested in this court.

¶60

It is always open for the petitioner to renew his request, if there is a positive changed circumstance especially after the examination of material witnesses.

¶61