Sadashiv S/O Kallappa Uppar Vs the State of Karnataka

SADASHIV S/O KALLAPPA UPPAR AGE 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. HULLOLLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI PIN CODE 591309. (BY SRI. MAHANTESH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HUKKERI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP)

¶16

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 483 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO ENLARGED THE PETITIONER/A1 ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO. 47/2020 IN HUKKERI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 273 AND 328 OF IPC AND 32 AND 34 KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, PENDING BEFORE THE VII ADDL. DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI, SITTING AT CHIKKODI IN S.C.NO. 5109/2021, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶18

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

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC-D:660 CRL.P No. 105068 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

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

¶24

Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent-State.

¶25

Heard Sri. Mahantesh S. Hiremath, learned

¶26

counsel for the petitioner and Sri. P. N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

¶27

Petitioner is the accused who has been granted bail in respect of the Crime No.47/2020 of Hukkeri Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 273, 328 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 32 and 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, which is now pending in S.C. No.5109/2021 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi sitting at Chikodi.

¶28

Petitioner has jumped the bail and thereafter, he

¶29

has been taken into custody by the jurisdictional Court after securing his presence by issuing non-bailable warrant.

¶30

The attempt made by the petitioner to seek for grant of bail is turned down by the learned Trial Judge on

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC-D:660 CRL.P No. 105068 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

the ground that the petitioner having jumped the bail has violated the condition. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend

¶36

that the petitioner intentionally did not jump the bail and due to unavoidable circumstances, he could not appear before the Court nor instruct his Advocate to seek for exemption, which resulted in issuing non-bailable warrant and the petitioner being sent to judicial custody.

¶37

He would further contend that the petitioner is ready to pay the bond amount and one more chance may be given for him to appear before the Court regularly. Hence, sought for grant of bail.

¶38

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State would oppose the bail grounds by contending that the petitioner has proved the apprehensions of the prosecution that he would not be available for trial as true by his conduct and therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC-D:660 CRL.P No. 105068 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Having heard the arguments of both sides, this

¶43

Court perused the matter on record meticulously.

¶44

On such perusal, it is found that the petitioner

¶45

has admittedly jumped the bail due to conduct attributable to himself.

¶46

However, since the petitioner had the benefit of grant of bail earlier, and because of his conduct in jumping the bail, bond executed by him stood automatically forfeited.

¶47

Thus, by collecting the bond amount and imposing further stringent conditions, the petition needs to be allowed.

¶48

Accordingly, the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(i) The petition is allowed .

¶51

(ii) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail by executing a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/with two sureties for the like sum.

¶52

5 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:660 CRL.P No. 105068 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

(iii) Petitioner shall be released from the

¶55

custody only after he pays/deposits the entire bond amount before the

¶56

Trial Court.

¶57

(iv) Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

¶58

(v) Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly.

¶59

(vi) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Belagavi District

¶60

without prior permission.

¶61

Violation of the above conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail and his bail request could not be entertained thereafter.

¶62

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶63

SMM / Ct-cmu

¶64

LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 10

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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K S M Mohamed Saleem S/O Mohamed Karim Vs the State of Karnataka

Yashavant S/O Shantappa Benageri Alias Bennigeri Vs State of Karnataka

Gopal S/O Lingappa Malgiti Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Appayya S/O Rachayya Mathapathi Vs the State of Karnataka by (Athani Ps ) Belagavi

Malakari S/O Balakrishna Hudedamani Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mahadevappa S/O Hanumantappa Bhimakkanavar Vs the State of Karnataka