Dismissed¶41

Kishor S/O Kalyan @ Goswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Mar 2025CRL.P/200420/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

regular bail; S. 483 BNSS; S. 439 Cr.PC; Sections 392, 302, 120(B) r/w 34 IPC; murder for gain; robbery with murder; criminal conspiracy; common intention; Hunasagi Police Station Crime No.3/2021; S.C.No.56/2021 District and Sessions Judge Yadgir; jewellery shop; gold chain polishing; recovery of gold at the instance of accused; nature and gravity of offence; accused native of Rajasthan; Karnataka High Court Kalaburagi Bench; Justice S Rachaiah; bail petition rejected/dismissed; NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035.

What did the court decide?

Prima facie, the petitioner had committed murder for gain, the gold articles having been recovered at his instance. ¶41

Kishor S/O Kalyan @ Goswamy Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035 CRL.P No. 200420 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200420 OF 2025

¶9

(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

KISHOR S/O KALYAN @ GOSWAMY, AGE:24 YEARS, OCC: WORKING IN GOLDSMITH SHOP, R/AT. PRUTVIPURA, TQ. BILLAD, DIST.JODHPUR, RAJASTHAN STATE, NOW R/AT. HUNASAGI, DIST.YADGIRI -585215.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI B. C. JAKA, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI

¶16

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH HUNASAGI POLICE STATION, TQ. AND DIST.YADGIRI – 585215, NOW REPRESENTED BY, ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH – 585107.

¶18

(BY SRI SIDDALING P. PATIL, ASSP AND SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/SEC 483 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN S.C NO.56/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT YADGIRI ARISING IN CRIME NO. 03/2021 OF HUNASAGI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC 392, 302, 120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035 CRL.P No. 200420 of 2025

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.1 seeking regular bail in S.C.No.56/2021 arising out of Crime No.3/2021 registered by the Hunasagi Police Station, Yadgir for the offences punishable under Sections 392m 302, 120(B) read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶27

Factual matrix of the case are as under :

¶28

It is the case of the prosecution that on 13.01.2021, at about 3.30 p.m., the complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent - police stating that an unknown person had killed his son. Based on the said information, the respondent police have registered a case in Cr.No.3/2021 and started investigation. During the investigation, the facts of the case has been emerged in such a way that Accused No.1-Kishore was staying along with the complainant by doing work in the jewellery shop of the complainant. Accused No.2-Ajith used to do gold chain polishing work. The complainant had entrusted the work of

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035 CRL.P No. 200420 of 2025

¶30

getting the gold chain polished from accused No.2. Accused No.2 took the gold chain and went out of the shop.

¶31

It is stated that both accused Nos. 1 and 2 hatched conspiracy that the complainant had kept gold and silver articles in his house, if they kill his son who is staying at home, they may get good number of jewelleries and they may be settled in their lives. Thinking in that manner, accused No.1 killed the son of the complainant and looted entire gold and silver articles kept in the house and went along with accused No.2. Subsequently, the accused have been traced and gold articles were recovered and the same have been identified and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶32

Heard Sri. B.C.Jaka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Siddaling P Patil, learned ASSP and Sri. Jamadar Shahabuddin, Learned HCGP for respondent – State.

¶33

It is the submission of learned counsel for the

¶34

petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, the petitioner himself informed about the death of the son of the

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035 CRL.P No. 200420 of 2025

¶37

complainant over phone and also had informed that he had been kidnapped by the person who killed the son of the complainant. However, the jurisdictional police instead of conducting proper investigation, fixed the petitioner as one of the accused only in order to harass the petitioner.

¶38

It is further submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Rajastan State, having deep roots in the Society and he will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶39

7. Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that it is established that the petitioner was working with complainant and also he was staying along with the family members. After the incident, during investigation, the respondent police recovered the gold articles and the same has been handed over to the complainant after proper identification. Such being the fact, it is not appropriate at this stage, to grant bail, since he belongs to Rajastan State. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State prays to dismiss the petition.

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2035 CRL.P No. 200420 of 2025

¶41

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it makes it clear that the petitioner being an accused No.1 is stated to have committed murder and looted the property of the complainant. It is also noticed that the said gold articles were recovered at the instance of the petitioner. Prima-facie , it appears that he had committed murder for gain. Therefore, having considered the nature and gravity of the offence, it is not appropriate to grant bail. Accordingly, the petition stands rejected.

¶42

Ordered, accordingly.

¶43

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶44

JS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 CT:PK

Kishor S/O Kalyan @ Goswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishor S/O Kalyan @ Goswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar Vs the State of Karnataka

Muniram Renuka Prasad Vs State of Karnataka

Kamalakar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sunil S/O Maruti Kuntenor Vs the State of Karnataka

Mangesh @ Mangya Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahantesh Vs the State of Karnataka