Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 304
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
VENKATESH NAIK T, J.
Veeresh S/o. Narayanappa shilaveri - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Karnataka - Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102214, 102337, 102330 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS)
Decided On : 30-06-2025
For the Appellant :SHRI ANKIT DESAI, ADVOCATE, SHRI SABEEL AHMED AND MOHAMED ABRAR S., ADVOCATES
For the Respondent: SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP
The court emphasized the necessity of following mandatory investigative procedures and determined that procedural violations justify granting bail under certain conditions, despite ongoing investigations.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 179 and 180 - Criminal Procedure Code, Section 439 - Grant of bail - Petitioners accused of using fake currency notes while purchasing liquor, but not habitual offenders - Mandatory provisions under Sections 181 and 185 not followed during investigation - Prima facie case established; petitioners entitled to bail on conditions. (Paras 2-12)
(B) Granting bail - Consideration of factors such as nature of allegations, character of the petitioners, and likelihood of tampering with evidence - Not all accused require equal treatment if circumstances differ. (Paras 10-12)
Facts of the case:
Accused implicated in a case of using counterfeit currency to buy alcohol; investigation revealed not all procedural requirements were met by police.
Findings of Court:
Petitions allowed subject to conditions including regular court appearance and no tampering with witnesses.
Issues: Whether the petitioners were falsely implicated and if bail should be granted despite ongoing investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that mere suspicion does not justify denial of bail when procedural violations exist, hence granting bail with conditions was appropriate.
Result: Petitions allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the fir and investigation (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on investigation irregularities (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. ratio for granting bail (Para 12) |
ORDER :
VENKATESH NAIK T, J.
Heard Sri.Ankit Desai, Sri.Sabeel Ahmed and Sri.Mohamed Abrar S., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Kirtilata Patil, learned HCGP for respondent- State.
2. Crl.P.No.102330/2025 is filed by petitioner- accused No.5, Crl.P.102337/2025 is filed by the accused Nos.6 and 7 and Crl.P.No.102214/2025 is filed by the petitioner-accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., [483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] to grant bail in Crime No.94/2025 of Gangavati Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of BNS -2023.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case is as under;
One Gangadhar Vereshappa lodged first information report (FIR) to the respondent-Police alleging that on 02.05.2025 at about 7 p.m. when he was at the cash counter of the bar and restaurant, accused Nos.1 and 2 came to the bar and took full bottle of Royal Stage whisky worth Rs.1,205-00. They tendered 3 notes of Rs.500 denomination totaling Rs.1,500/- and requested for change. On suspicion of the said notes, the complainant examined them with a currency verification machine and discovered that they were fake currency notes. Therefore, he informed the said aspect to the Manager and Assistant Manager and when they enquired with accused Nos.1 and 2 about fake notes they ran away from the spot. However, they were caught by other persons and produced before the police. Based on the complaint, Gangavathi police registered the case in Crime No.94/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of BNS -2023, this lead to the registration of FIR and investigation. During the course of investigation, accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested and the investigation officer recorded their voluntary statements. Pursuant to their voluntary statements, the name of accused Nos.3, 5, 6 and 7 were disclosed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, they pray to allow the petitions.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that there is a prima facie allegation against the petitioners. The investigation is still in progress. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation and thus, prays for rejection of bail petitions.
6. Perused the material available on record.
7. On perusal of the material available on record, the record reveals that accused Nos.1 and 2 had been to the bar and restaurant of first informant, and after purchasing alcohol bottles, accused Nos.1 and 2 tendered three currency notes of Rs.500-00, which appears to be fake. On enquiry, accused Nos.1 and 2 did not answer properly and they tried to escape from the spot. However, they were secured by the general public and produced before the Police.
8. From the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioners are not habitual offenders, and the learned HCGP did not dispute the said aspect.
9. In the instant case, the investigating officer has seized fake currency notes total for a sum of Rs.1,00,000- 00 along with original currency notes from the possession of all the accused persons. However, investigation officer has not followed the monitory provisions under Section 181 of BNSS -2023 which reads as under:
“181. Statements to police and use thereof.-(1) No statement made by any person to a police officer in the course of an investigation under this Chapter, shall, if reduced to writing, be signed by the person making it; nor shall any such statement or any record thereof, whether in a police diary or otherwise, or
