IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16429 OF 2025 [(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)]

BETWEEN:

MOHAMMED MUSEEB S/O.MOHAMED ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT: GOLLARAHALLI, 1^ST BLOCK, KUDUR TOWM, MAGADI TALUK - 561 101 PRESENTLY R/AT:

4^TH BLOCK, MARUTHINAGARA, KUDUR TOWN, MAGADI TALUK, BANGALORE SOTH DISTRICT - 561 101.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVIKUMARA B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINAR AYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI THE STATE BY KUDUR POLICE STATION Location: HIGH REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDING, KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL TO THIS PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.302/2025, KUDUR POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS

189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 109 AND 190 OF BNS, 2023 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, MAGADI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.6 (as per charge sheet accused No.7) under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in Crime No.302/2025 of Kudur Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 109 and 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -

State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that, the petitioner has been shown as accused No.6 in the remand application and now, charge sheet has been filed and he has been shown as accused No.7 in the charge sheet. As per column-17 of the charge sheet, the only accusation against this petitioner/accused No.7 is intimating the movement of C.W.2/injured to accused No.1 and juvenile No.1 over phone. The petitioner was not present on the spot at the time of incident. The serious overtact of assault is alleged against accused Nos.3 to 6. The petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. The petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents. With these, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent would contend that, only on the basis of information given by this petitioner, the other accused went to the spot where injured was there and assaulted him and caused severe injuries. The charge sheet materials show that, there is a prima-facie case against this petitioner. With these, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for parties, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

6. As per the charge sheet, there was enmity between accused No.1 and C.W.2/injured with regard to financial matters. Accused No.1 decided to kill C.W.2 and informed the same to petitioner and juvenile No.1 and for that this petitioner and juvenile No.1 has agreed to intimate the movement of C.W.2. Accordingly, on 24.09.2025 this petitioner and juvenile No.1 have intimated movement of C.W.2 to accused No.1. Accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 came in a car and accused Nos.3, 4, 5 and 6 got down from that car and on seeing the same, C.W.2 started running and accused persons chased him holding deadly weapons and when C.W.2 fell down on the mud road, accused No.3 assaulted him with talwar on his head and when he fell down, accused No.2 assaulted with machete, accused No.5 assaulted with another machete and accused No.6 assaulted with dagger on back of head, left eye, hands and caused severe injuries. Considering the above aspect, the overtact of assault is alleged against the petitioner is that he intimated movement of C.W.2 to accused No.1 over phone. The petitioner was not pres