Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.
Shri. Shrishail Alagouda @ Alagonda Chowgala – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Karnataka (Harugeri P.S.), By It’s State Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 103151 of 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS))
Decided On : 28-08-2025
ORDER :
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.
Accused No.1 in S.C. No.5049 of 2024 pending before the Court of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikkodi arising out of Crime No.112 of 2024 registered by Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120B, 364, 302, 201 of IPC, is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 seeking a regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.112 of 2024 was registered by Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi initially for offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC against petitioner and others based on the first information dated 12.06.2024 received from Smt. Bharati Irappa Chougla wife of deceased Irappa Algond Chougla. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 13.04.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against seven persons and petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.1 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected and therefore, he had approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.101869 of 2025, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.06.2025 with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application before the Sessions Court since the other accused were granted bail. Thereafter, petitioner had filed a fresh bail application before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.5306 of 2025, which was rejected on 25.07.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.
4. Material on record would go to show that the first informant in the present case is the wife of deceased Irappa Algond Chougla. Father of Irappa Algond Chougla had filed a missing complaint before the Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi on 04.06.2024 alleging that his son Irappa Algond Chougla was missing from their house from at about 10:00 p.m. on 04.06.2024 onwards. Based on the missing complaint, FIR was registered in Crime No.106 of 2024 by Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi on 06.06.2024. It appears that UDR No.17 of 2024 was registered by Bilagi Police Station on 07.06.2024 after the dead body of an unknown person was found within the jurisdiction of Bilagi Police Station. In the report of the UDR case, it is mentioned that the dead body of an unknown male was found lying under a bridge from 03.06.2024 till 06.06.2024.
5. It appears that during the course of investigation of the missing complainant in Crime No.106 of 2024 registered by Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi, petitioner herein was summoned and based on his confession statement, FIR in Crime No.112 of 2024 was subsequently registered by Harugeri Police Station, Belagavi against him and others, after first information from his wife, Smt. Bharati was received by the Police. In the present case, petitioner was arrested on 13.06.2024 and was subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet is filed against seven persons.
6. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that petitioner had an ill-will against his brother deceased Irappa Algond Chougla for the reason that his brother had opposed sale of a family property. On the other hand, he approached the Jurisdictional Civil Court and filed a case. It is in this background, accused No.1 had contacted accused No.2 and had conspired to commit murder of his brother Irappa Algond Chougla. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that accused No.1 had agreed to pay a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- to accused Nos.2 to 7 for the purpose of committing the murder of his brother Irappa Algond Chougla and in furtherance of such a conspiracy, on 04.06.2024 at about 21:30 hours, accused Nos.1 to 7 kidnapped Irappa Algond Chougla in an Innova car with the assistance of two other juvenile accused. Subsequently, they stopped the Innova car at Sulthanpura Village and when accu
Bail granted based on lack of criminal record and time served in custody amidst circumstantial evidence in a conspiracy murder case.
The court grants bail based on the petitioners' lack of prior criminal records and the protracted timeline of the trial process, emphasizing the necessity for a fair trial without undue detention.
The court granted bail due to lengthy custody, similarity of allegations with a co-accused who received bail, and lack of evidence suggesting witness tampering.
Court permits bail for a petitioner based on lack of direct evidence of involvement in a crime, with established conditions due to other co-accused obtaining bail.
The delay in trial proceedings and the grant of bail to other accused can influence the decision to grant bail based on parity and the reliance on circumstantial evidence.
The court upheld that bail should be denied in serious offences involving premeditated murder due to potential harm to the investigation and the risk of witness tampering.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 necessitates granting bail when material witnesses have been examined, irrespective of the seriousness of the crime.
Bail should be granted when intent to commit murder is not clearly established, and circumstances suggest reasonable doubt about culpability.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 necessitates granting bail if prolonged detention occurs without substantive progress in proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
