The court ruled that the seriousness of charges and ongoing risk to witnesses outweigh the defendant's custody length and medical claims, justifying bail denial.

ORDER :

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.

This petition is filed by the petitioner -accused No.1 praying to grant bail in Crime No.244/2023 of Tunga Nagar Police Station, Shivamogga pending in S.C.No.11/2024 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga registered for offences punishable under Sections 302 , 450, 396, 120-B. 201 of IPC .

2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional SPP for the respondent –State.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Except recovery of cash, no other circumstances against the petitioner. The petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 02 years 05 months and trial is not yet commenced. The petitioner met with road traffic accident 03 years ago and sustained injury to knee. He has been operated and implant has been fixed. The said implant requires to be removed by surgery. The petitioner is having L4-L5 disc bulge. He is treated in the jail hospital and he requires further treatment in the higher center. The accusation against the petitioner is that he held legs of the petitioner. But the post-mortem report indicates that the cause of death is smothering. There is no allegation against this petitioner of smothering the deceased. As the case is based on circumstances, the circumstances cannot be tampered with. The petitioner is resident of Shivamogga. He is having wife, three children and parents and he has to look after them. The petitioner has not been furnished with the grounds of arrest as mandated under Article 22 of Constitution of India. On that point, he placed reliance of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs State of Maharashtra and another , 2025 INSC 1288 . He further contented that as the trial is not yet commenced, it has affected speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. On that ground he is entitled to grant of bail and on that point, he placed reliance of the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Akarsh K.R. Vs State of Karnataka , NC: : KHC : 15899 . On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and grant bail to the petitioner –accused No.2.

4. Per contra, learned Additional SPP for the respondent –State would contend that the petitioner was working as a driver in the house of deceased and C.W.1. He was aware that they have kept cash of Rs.30,00,000/- in the house and he misused his position and committed murder and dacoity. The petitioner is a main person he planned for murder and dacoity. The petitioner is a mastermind in committing the murder and dacoity. Accused Nos.2 and 3 have joined in the plan of the petitioner and they have also entered the house of the deceased and taken part in commission of offence of murder and dacoity. At the time of commission of offence, accused No.2 has sustained injury when he was assaulting the deceased. There is a recovery of cash of Rs.17,190/- from the person of the petitioner and cash of Rs.7,10,000/- at the instance of the petitioner from his house. The post-mortem report indicates that the deceased has sustained 28 injuries and cause of death is due to injuries sustained. There is CCTV footage containing movements of the petitioner and other accused at the time of commission of the offence. Bail petition of accused No.3 in Criminal Petition No.5933/2024 has been rejected by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 16.07.2024. If the petitioner is granted bail, there is threat to prosecution witnesses and chances o