Basavarappa & Ors. vs The State Of Karnataka

Heard the learned counsel Sri.V.M.Banakar for the petitioners and Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for respondent-State.

The petitioner/accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 10 have filed Crl.P.No.102788/2026 under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail, whereas petitioners/accused Nos.3, 5 to 9, 11 and 12 have filed Crl.P.No.102812/2026 under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) seeking anticipatory bail in connection with crime No.127/2026 of Ranebennur Rural Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 189(2), 191(2), 329(4), 103(1), 352, 351(2), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Ranebennur.

The brief facts of the prosecution case in nutshell are as under:

There was a long standing dispute between the defacto complainant and the accused persons, as to the sharing of their properties and the matter is pending before the court. The matter was earlier settled by the elders of the village, however, the matter could not be resolved completely. Hence, the elders instructed both the parties to approach the court and decide their issue. When things stood thus, on 25.05.2026 at 07:00 p.m., all the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly, trespassed into the house of defacto complainant, and picked up quarrel with C.Ws.1, 6 and 7 in respect of sharing of the property and caused hurt to them and they outraged the modesty of CW.6. In the meanwhile, deceased Karabasappa, the brother of defacto complainant, tried to pacify the quarrel, however, all the accused persons also assaulted him with hands and legs. Hence, he sustained injuries. As he had undergone surgical operation and applied stent to his heart, he died on the same day at 07:30 p.m. Therefore, the defacto complainant lodged the complaint, which lead to registration of an FIR and investigation.

During the course of investigation, the petitioners/accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 10 were arrested and in turn, they were remanded to judicial custody. Apprehending their arrest, petitioners/accused Nos.3, 5 to 9, 11 and 12 have filed anticipatory bail petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contented that there is long standing enmity between the family of the defacto complainant and the accused persons and they are close relatives. In fact, the deceased Karabasappa was undergone surgical operation earlier, and he died due to acute cardiac failure resulting from pacemaker conduction failure (stent/leads as mentioned in PM report) precipitated by blunt force trauma to the chest. Further, the petitioners have not used any deadly weapon and no external injury or scratch injury found on the person of the dead body of the deceased Karabasappa. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. The petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed to allow the petitions.

Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently contended that the petitioners are involved in the commission of the murder. They assaulted the deceased with their hands and legs and CWs.1, 6 to 13 have seen the incident. The postmortem examination report reveals that the cause of death is due to cardiac failure precipitated by blunt force trauma to the chest of the deceased. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper the prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation and there is possibility of committing similar offence. Hence, learned HCGP prayed to reject the petitions.

On perusal of the material available on record, it is clearly demonstrated that the family of the defacto complainant and the petitioners are close relatives and there is a dispute between both the families in respect of sharing of their land. On the day of the incident also, these petitioners came to the house of defacto complainant in order to demand share in the family property. The statements of CWs.1, 6 to 11 who are an eyewitness to the incident have stated that all the accused persons demanded share in the property and there was scuffle between both the parties. In the incident, they assaulted CWs.1 and 6, who sustained simple injury. In the incident, when the deceased Karabasappa tried to pacify the quarrel, he also assaulted by the petitioners. It is admitted fact that earlier the deceased was undergone surgical operation and had applied stent to his heart. The perusal of the postmortem report, more particularly the final opinion of the Haveri Institute of Medical Science, Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, the cause of death is due to acute cardiac failure resulting from pacemaker conduction failure (stent/leads as mentioned in PM report) precipitated by blunt force trauma to the chest. The perusal of the entire material available on record, prima facie the petitioners had no intention to eliminate the deceased and their intention was to demand the share in the property and hence, there was a scuffle between both the parties. Admittedly, the investigation is completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet.

On perusal of the entire prosecution papers and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking into the nature of allegation made against the petitioners, gravity of offence, severity of punishment, chances of petitioners absconding or fleeing away from justice if released on bail, character and antecedents of the petitioners tampering of the prosecution witnesses, the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail by imposing certain conditions.

Accordingly, the Court proceeds to pass the following: