Manjunath S/O Sayappa Naik v. State of Karnataka

NC:(2025:KHC-D:18679( CRL.P(No.(105266(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA,(AT(DHARWAD( THDATED(THIS(THE(19 (DAY(OF(DECEMBER(2025( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S.RACHAIAH( CRIMINAL(PETITION(NO.(105266(OF(2025(( (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)-)( ( BETWEEN:(( (

1., MANJUNATH,S/O,SAYAPPA,NAIK,, AGE:,39,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,CHIKKUR,,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., ,

2., KRISHNA,S/O,MALLAPPA,NAYIK,, AGE:,38,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,YADAHALLI,,TQ.,MUDHOL,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., ,

3., SIDDU,S/O,RAMAPPA,YALLATI,, AGE:,26,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,SORAGANV,,TQ.,MUDHOL,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., , Digitally 4., ABHISHEK,S/O,SHIVAPPA,TALAWAR,, signedtiby SREEDHARAN AGE:,19,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, BANGALORE SUSHMA R/O:,JAMKHANDI,ROAD,,JANATA,POLT, LAKSHMI MUDHOL,,DIST.,BAGALKOT., Location:0High Courttiof , Karnataka

5., PRAVEEN,S/O,SANGAPPA,JAMAGOUD,, AGE:,25,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,KULALI,,TQ.,MUDHOL,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., ,

6., SIDDAPPA,S/O,NAGAPPA,ULLAGADDI,, AGE:,25,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,SANGANATTI,,, TQ.,RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., NC:(2025:KHC-D:18679( CRL.P(No.(105266(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

7., NAGAPPA,S/O,SHIVAPPA,ITNAL,, AGE:,56,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,SANGANATTI,, TQ.,RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., ,

8., MANJUNATH,S/O,GOVINDAGOUD,LAKKAM,, AGE:,36,YEARS,,OCC.,AGRICULTURE,, R/O:,JEERAGAL,,TQ.,MUDHOL,, DIST.,BAGALKOT., …PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,SRINIVAS,B.,NAIK,,ADVOCATE), ( AND:( ( STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,, REP.,BY,STAE,PUBLIC,PROSECUTOR,, HIGH,COURT,OF,KARNATAKA, DHARWAD,BENCH,, HROUGH,MAHALINGPUR,POLICE,STATION,, BANAHATTI,TALUKA,,, BAGALKOT,DISTRICT-,580011., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.,PRAVEENA,Y.,DEVARADDIYAVARA,,ADVOCATE), , , THIS,CRIMINAL, PETITION, IS,FILED, U/S.,439, OF, CR.P.C., (U/S.,483,OF,BNSS,,2023),SEEKING,TO,GRANT,REGULAR,BAIL, TO,THE,PETITIONERS/ACCUSED,NO,22,TO,26,AND,28,TO,30,IN, CRIME, NO.75/2025, OF, (MAHALINGPUR, POLICE, STATION), ON, THE, FILE, OF, THE, SENIOR, CIVIL, JUDGE, AND, JMFC, COURT, BANAHATTI, REGISTERED, FOR, THE, OFFENCES, PUNISHABLE, UNDER, SECTION, 3, AND, 4, OF, PREVENTION, OF, DAMAGE, TO, PUBLIC, PROPERTY, ACT,, 1984, AND, UNDER, SECTIONS, 121(2),, 121(1),,109,,132,,324(5),,189(2),,324(4),,191(3),,191(2),,190,, 61(2),AND,326(g),OF,BNS,,2023,AND,ETC., , , THIS, CRIMINAL, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, ( ( CORAM:, THE,HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,S.RACHAIAH,

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

¶1The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 22 to 26 and 28 to 30 respectively, seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.75/2025 of respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and under Sections 121(2), 121(1), 109, 132, 324(5), 189(2), 324(4), 191(3), 191(2), 190, 61(2) and 326(g) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita, (for brevity, 'BNS'), 2023.

Brief facts of the case:

¶2The case of the prosecution is that a complaint came to be filed by the PSI (Law and Order) on 13.11.2025, stating that on 07.11.2025, the farmers, in and around Mudhol Taluk, Belagavi District, were on agitation, seeking for revised price for sugarcane. There were around 700 farmers assembled in the cane yard at Godavari Sugar Factory and they are stated to have been formed an unlawful assembly and caused injuries to the police and also obstructed the police official in discharging their

official duty. Hence, a complaint came to be lodged against the petitioners. Based on the complaint, the respondent police have registered a case in Cr.No.75/2025 against the petitioners. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted for the aforesaid offences.

¶3Heard Sri. Srinivas B Naik, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Praveen Y. Devareddiyavar, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -State.

¶4It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are the innocent of the alleged offences and they are the farmers. They have been falsely implicated in this case. As per the averments of the complaint and the FIR, it is stated that there were 17 members were named in the said FIR. However, the present petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case only in order to trouble them. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, learned counsel prays to allow the petition.

¶5Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent State vehemently submitted that the petitioners being the members of an unlawful assembly, with an intention to deter the police officials in discharging their official duties, pelted stones and caused damage to the Government vehicles. Further, the petitioners along with others, set fire to the tractors/trailers and six motor cycles and thereby, caused huge loss to the other farmers. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant them bail. Making such submissions, learned HCGP prays to reject the petition.

¶6Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint, it appears that the PSI (Law and Order) lodges a complaint stating that the farmers who are the petitioners herein being the members of an unlawful assembly are stated to have caused damage to the public property and also interfered with the police officials and obstructed them in discharging their official duty. However, as per the complaint, there were 700 members who are stated to have been gathered in the said assembly. Moreover, the names of 17 farmers were named in the FIR.

Therefore, in my considered view, the petitioners are entitled for the relief as prayed for by imposing suitable conditions which would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.75/2025 of respondent-police for the aforesaid offences on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- each with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

(iii) The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

In case, if the petitioners violate any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.

Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE

JS/-, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26