LAXMIKANT @ KANTU vs THE STATE THROUGH
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200847 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
LAXMIKANT @ KANTU
S/O SHIVAPUTRAPPA TALIKOTI,
AGE : 30 YEARS,
OCC : AGRICULTURE,
R/O: PATTAN VILLAGE,
KALABURAGI - 585 311.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI VISHAL PRATAP SINGH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE,
THROUGH SUB-URBAN P.S.,
KALABURAGI,
REPRESENTED BY ADDL SPP,
HIGH COURT,
KALABURAGI BENCH,
KALABURAGI – 585 412.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SIDDALING P. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS (439
OF CR.P.C), PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/
ACCUSED NO.4 ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.185/2025 REGISTERED
BY THE SUB-URBAN P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 61(1), 49, 103(1), 238,
352, 351(1)(2) R/W SECTION 190 OF BNS-2023 AND SECTIONS
25(1)(a) AND 27(3) OF INDIAN ARMS ACT.
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/
accused No.4 and the learned Addl. SPP for the
respondent/ State. Perused the relevant materials on
record.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused No.4 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’), praying to
grant him bail in the case in Crime No.185/2025 of the
respondent Police for the offences punishable under
Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 61(1), 49, 103(1),
238, 352, 351(1)(2), read with Section 190 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections 25(1)(a),
and 27(3) of Indian Arms Act, pending before the
learned V Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Gulbarga.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
3. The learned Addl. SPP has orally objected to
the petition submitting that there are sufficient
materials against the petitioner regarding his direct
involvement in the offence and there are overt-acts of
the petitioner in the incident. This Court has rejected
bail application of some of the co-accused. Mere fact
that the investigation is completed and the charge sheet
is filed cannot be ground to release the petitioner on bail
considering the nature and gravity of the offence
alleged. The allegations made against the petitioner and
other accused persons would show that if the petitioner
is released on bail, there is chance of him tampering
with prosecution witnesses and hampering trial of the
case. Therefore, the learned Addl. SPP has sought for
rejection of the petition.
4. The case alleged against the petitioner and
other accused persons is that the complainant
Sharanabasappa S/o. Srimanta Tugadi is having 3 sons
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
by names Siddharod, Laxmiputra and Annaraya. His
son Siddharod is one of the deceased in the incident.
He was running dhaba and there was dispute between
him and one Somnath Talikoti. The said Somnath
Talikoti was murdered and the concerned accused
persons were subsequently released on bail. Siddharod
was one of the accused persons in the murder case of
Somnath Talikoti. Hence, the wife of Somnath Talikoti,
who is accused No.1 along with other accused persons,
caused the death of Siddharod. It is alleged that on
25.06.2025 at about 00.45 hours the petitioner along
with other accused persons came to the dhaba of the
deceased and picked up quarrel with the deceased
Siddharod and assaulted him with sugarcane chopper
and other weapons and caused his death. The accused
persons also assaulted other two persons and caused
their death and thereby committed the alleged offences.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
5. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that there is no overt-act of the petitioner in
the alleged incident. If the contents of the charge sheet
is taken into consideration, the allegations against this
petitioner is that he put chilly powder in eyes of the
deceased Siddharod and also caught hold of Ramanna
under the impression that he was Annaraya. Therefore,
there is no direct involvement of the petitioner in the
alleged incident.
Per contra
6. , as submitted by the learned Addl.
SPP, if the prosecution papers on record are considered,
there are sufficient materials to show that the petitioner
was present at the spot of the incident and he was
involved in the alleged incident. There is also overt-act
of the petitioner in the incident. Therefore, any of the
contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against
him does not merit consideration.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
7. Moreover, the offence alleged against the
petitioner and other accused persons is punishable
under Section 103 of BNS along with other offences of
causing death of three persons. Moreover, there are
grudge, ill-will and motive on the part of the accused
persons including the petitioner forthcoming from the
prosecution for causing death of the deceased persons,
especially Siddharod.
8. Mere fact that the investigation is over and
the charge sheet is filed against the petitioner cannot be
a ground to release the petitioner on bail. On the other
hand, filing of the charge sheet would clearly show that
there are sufficient materials against the petitioner for
the alleged offence. As pointed out by the learned Addl.
SPP, there are 24 injuries found on the body of the
deceased Siddharod. The cumulative effect of the
allegations made against the petitioner and other
accused persons would clearly show that there are
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
sufficient material against the petitioner for the alleged
offence. No any special ground is made out by the
petitioner for grant of bail in his favour at this stage.
9. It is true that the bail is rule and jail is an
exception. But every case should be considered on the
basis of the facts of each case. If the contents of the
complaint and the charge sheet are taken into
consideration, it would be clear that if the petitioner is
released on bail, there is chance of him tampering with
prosecution witnesses and hampering trial of the case.
10. Moreover, if the facts of the prosecution case
are considered, it is clear that if the petitioner is on bail,
there would be also threat to his life by the opposite
party, who are belonging to the family of the deceased.
Therefore, the petitioner has failed to make out any
ground to grant bail in his favour and hence, this
petition is liable to be dismissed.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11148
CRL.P No. 200847 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030066682026
11. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
SBS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5