Iresh S/O Mahantesh Kallasannavar Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 483 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ON REGULAR BAIL IN GARAG P.S. CRIME NO.82/2025 SC NO.57/2025 PENDING ON THE FILES OF PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AT DHARWAD FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

U/S 103(1), 109, 238, R/W 3(5) OF BNS 2023, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

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

¶25

Heard Sri. Gourishankar S. Mot, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.

¶26

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter ‘BNSS’ for short) seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.82/2025 registered by Garag Police Station for the offence publishable under Sections 103(1), 109, 238 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter ‘BNS’ for short) with the following prayer:

¶27

“Wherefore, the petitioner/accused No.3 most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court be

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

pleased to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.3 on regular bail in Garag Police Station Crime No.82/2025 in SC No.57/2025 pending on the file of Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge at Dharwad, for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 109, 238 R/w.3(5) of BNS, 2023, in the interest of justice.”

¶31

The gist of the case is that; a complaint came to be lodged before Garag Police Station by the wife of the deceased namely Rekha Mathapati on 29.04.2025 at about 11.00 p.m., stating that her husband Shankarayya Mathpati has been murdered on the platform situated in front of her house. She has specifically stated that two persons had come on motorcycle and they stabbed her husband on chest and other parts of the body with knife and caused his death. She has taken the names of Deepak and Nataraj @ Nagaraj, who are accused Nos.1 and 2.

¶32

The police registered the case in Crime

¶33

No.82/2025 for the offences stated supra and after completion of investigation, filed the charge sheet. The

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

present petitioner is shown as accused No.3 in the charge sheet.

¶38

The role assigned to the present

¶39

petitioner/accused No.3 in the charge sheet is that he was instructed to find out the movements of said Shankarayya Mathapati and inform it to the accused Nos.1 and 2 so as to they take away the life of the deceased. In that regard, except the voluntary statement recorded by the police, there is no other connecting material. The first attempt made by the petitioner to obtain an order of bail is turned down by the learned Trial Judge. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶40

Sri. Gourishankar S. Mot, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that a voluntary statement recorded by the police, alone cannot be the basis for arraigned the present petitioner as accused No.3 in the case on hand, in the absence of any other material. Therefore,

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

continuation of the petitioner in judicial custody is no longer warranted. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.

¶45

Per contra , Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent vehemently contended that the material on record would clearly shows that the petitioner/accused No.3 is the one who spotted the deceased and was sitting on the platform situated in front of the house of the deceased and intimated accused Nos.1 and 2 over telephone and thus, the act of murder has been accomplished by accused Nos.1 and 2 with the aid of others and therefore, the petitioner is equally responsible for the murder of deceased. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the bail petition.

¶46

Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.

¶47

On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that, even according to the prosecution case,

¶48

6 -

¶49

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

the role assigned to the present petitioner is only to collect information regarding the whereabouts of the deceased.

¶52

Whether the petitioner was responsible for revealing the movements and whereabouts of the deceased or not is a matter that cannot be decided by this Court at this juncture by holding a mini trial.

¶53

Suffice to say that if the charge sheet is filed, the continuation of the accused No.3/petitioner in judicial custody is no longer warranted in law. The fact is that there is no recovery from the petitioner, nor is there any other incriminating material on record which could vanish the existing evidence in the case on hand.

¶54

The learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State however expressed an apprehension that the grant of bail to accused No.3 would be utilized as ground of parity by the other accused. Such an apprehension can be met with by observing that the role assigned to the present petitioner is only to the extent as

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

discussed supra and therefore, per se it should not act as parity for the other accused persons.

¶59

With these observations, I proceed to pass the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶62

(ii) The petitioner is directed to be

¶63

enlarged on bail on executing personal

¶64

bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesome to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶65

(iii) The petitioner shall not leave the

¶66

jurisdiction of Dharwad District.

¶67

(iv) The petitioner shall not tamper the

¶68

prosecution witnesses in any manner.

¶69

8 -

¶70

NC: 2026:KHC-D:59 CRL.P No. 104361 of 2025

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

(v) The petitioner shall attend the

¶73

Court regularly.

¶74

In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.

¶75

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA)

¶76

JUDGE

¶77

SMM / CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11

Iresh S/O Mahantesh Kallasannavar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iresh S/O Mahantesh Kallasannavar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iranna S/O Manohar Jutti Vs Smt. Sushila W/O Chandrappa Kamble

Sharada W/O Geerish Nandanawad Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Sadhana Nishabt Lohar Vs Markandeya Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd.

Gonirudrappa Choudappa Tulajammanavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Imtiyaz Ahemad M.J. S/O Late Zainul Abdeen Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Mohan L Haramalakr S/O Laxman Haramalakar Vs State of Karnataka