01Facts
The petitioner, arrayed as accused No. 4, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from Crime No. 69/2026 of Savalgi Police Station.
¶ 2–3 · pp. 2–3The prosecution alleged that, following a dispute between the families, accused Nos. 1 to 5 conspired to kill the deceased; accused Nos. 1 to 4 allegedly assaulted him with knives, poured petrol on him, and set him on fire.
¶ 2–3 · pp. 2–3The petitioner maintained that no specific overt act or recovery was attributed to him and that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet filed.
¶ 5 · pp. 3–4The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the offence and the risk of witness tampering.
¶ 6 · p. 402Issues
i.1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail, having regard to the allegations, the evidence collected, and the relevant bail considerations.
¶ 9–11 · pp. 4–6ii.2. Whether the absence of a specific overt act attributed to the petitioner by the eyewitnesses, together with the completion of the investigation, supported his release on bail.
¶ 10–11 · pp. 5–603Law Applied
The petition was considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).
¶ 2 · p. 2In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the severity of the potential punishment, the likelihood of absconding, the petitioner’s character and antecedents, the risk of witness tampering, and the status of the investigation.
¶ 11 · p. 6The charged offences included Sections 61, 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 103(1), 326(f), and 238 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
¶ 2 · p. 2No precedent was cited.
Provisions in the judgment · 10 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 61Section 189Section 191Section 126Section 103Section 326Section 238Section 190
04Reasoning
The Court noted that the eyewitnesses, whose statements addressed the individual acts of accused Nos. 1 and 2, did not attribute any overt act to the petitioner.
¶ 10 · p. 5The allegation against him was that he participated in the conspiracy and instigated the others.
¶ 10 · p. 5Taking account of that evidentiary position, the completion of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and parity, the Court found that the petitioner could be released on bail subject to conditions safeguarding the proceedings.
¶ 10–11 · pp. 5–605Holding
The Court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner/accused No. 4’s release on regular bail upon executing a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum.
p. 6The conditions required him not to threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses, to cooperate with the investigating officer, to attend court regularly, and not to commit similar or other offences; breach could result in an application for cancellation of bail.
p. 7Original Court PDF
SHRI MAHAVEER S/O MAHADEV DHAREPPANAVARvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
