Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Nijam Udden vs State By on 3 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
CRL.A No. 2118 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2118 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED NIJAM UDDEN,
S/O. MOHAMMED JIYAUDDEEN,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/O NO.572, KARNATAKA HOSUING BOARD,
COPORATION, APMC MARKET NEAR,
MYSORE ROAD,
GUNDLUPETE TOWN -571111.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANIL SHEKAR K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY KARNATAKA
GUNDLUPETE POLICE STATION,
GUNDLUPETE - CHAMARAJNAGAR- 571111
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN N BENGALURU-560001.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. VASANTH,
S/O. LATE NAGESH,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT # BEHIND OLD HOSPITAL,
GUNDLUPETE TOWN,
GUNDLUPETE TALUK,
CHAMRAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571111.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1,
V/O DATED:03.11.2025 NOTICE TO R2
SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
CRL.A No. 2118 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND ENLARGE APPELLANT
ON BAIL IN SPL.C.C.NO.197/2025 IN CR.NO.158/2025 FOR AN
OFFENCE P/U/S 352,115(2),118(1),351(2),103(1) R/W 3(5) OF
BNS ACT 2023 AND SEC.3(2)(v),(v-a)OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
1989 BY THE RESPONDENT GUNDLUPET P.S. PENDING ON THE
FILE OF THE LEARNED PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AT CHAMARAJANAGAR AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellant/accused Mohammed Nijam Udden, has
preferred this appeal against the order dated 19.09.2025
in Special Case No.197/2025 passed by the Principal
District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagara.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are
referred as per their rank and status before the Trial
Court.
3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that, on the
basis of the complaint filed by one Vasantha, Gundlupete
Police have registered the case in Crime No.158/2025
against unknown accused for the commission of offences
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
under sections 103(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and
submitted First Information Report to the Court. After
investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the
charge sheet against the accused No.1-Mohammed Nijam
Udden and accused No.2 - Mohammed Rafi for the
commission of offences punishable under sections 352,
115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 103(1) r/w section 3(5) of BNS
and section 3(2)(v)(v-a) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
4. After arrest, the accused was produced before the
Special Court and was remanded to judicial custody. Till
this day, accused/appellant is in judicial custody.
5. Sri Anil Shekar K.S, learned counsel for the appellant
would submit that the name of the present appellant is not
found in the First Information Report. Only during the
course of investigation, the Investigating Officer had
arrested the accused and thereafter submitted the charge
sheet against the accused for the alleged commission of
offences. The accused has not committed any offence as
alleged against him.
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
6. The case of the prosecution is not supported with the
medical evidence. The final opinion given by the
Chamarajanagar Institute of Medical Sciences reveals that
the death is due to acute cardiac failure as a result of
coronary artery insufficiency. However, the deceased had
consumed alcohol prior to death.
7. Further he would submit that, the Department of
Forensic Medicine and Toxicology has given its opinion that
the injuries mentioned in the postmortem report are not
fatal and are sufficient to cause the death in ordinary
course of nature. The accused is not required for further
investigation. The accused is ready to abide by the
conditions imposed by this Court. On all these grounds,
he sought for allowing this appeal.
8. Sri B.Lakshman, the learned High Court Government
Pleader submits that there are prima facie materials to
attract the alleged commission of offence. The
Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
eye-witness CW-6. Hence, he sought for dismissal of this
appeal.
9. Having heard the arguments on both sides and on
perusal of the materials placed before this Court, the
points that would arise for my consideration are as under:
i) Whether the appellant has made out
grounds to interfere with the impugned order
passed by the Trial Court?
ii) What order?
10. My answer to the above points as under:
i) Affirmative
ii) As per final order.
Regarding Point No.1
11. I have examined the materials placed before me. On
the basis of complaint filed by Vasantha, Gundlupete Police
have registered the case in Crime No.158/2025 against
unknown accused for the commission of offences under
sections 103(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
12. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has
submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the
commission of offences punishable under sections 352,
115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 103(1) r/w section 3(5) of BNS
and section 3(2)(v)(v-a) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
13. In Column No.17 of the charge sheet, it is alleged as
under:
"17. ೇ ನ ಸಂ ಪ ವರ (ಅವಶ
ಅವಶ ಕ ದ ಪ ೆ ೕಕ ಾ ೆ ಲಗ ):-
ಗುಂಡು ೇ!ೆ !ೌ#ನ, $ಾಯಕರ &ೕ' (ಾ )ಾದ ಪ*+ಷ- ಪಂಗಡ $ಾಯಕ
ಜ$ಾಂಗ ೆ/ 0ೇ*ದ 0ಾ 01, ಮೃತ +ವ4 ಾಗೂ ಈ 7ೋ8ಾ9ೋಪ:ಾ
ಪತ ದ ಾಲಂ 12 ರ ಕಂಡ ಮು ಂ ಜ$ಾಂಗ ೆ/ 0ೇ*ದ ಆ9ೋ< 01 ಮತು
02 ರವರು ಗುಂಡು ೇ!ೆ !ೌ# (ಾ ಗ ೆ ಆ=ರುವ4ದ*ಂದ, ಮು ಂ
ಜ$ಾಂಗ ೆ/ 0ೇ*ದ ಆ9ೋ< 01-ಮತು 02 ರವ*>ೆ, ಮೃತ +ವ4 ರವರು
ಪ*+ಷ- ಪಂಗಡ $ಾಯಕ ಜ$ಾಂಗ ೆ/ 0ೇ*ದವ9ೆಂದು ?'ರುತ7ೆ.
'$ಾಂಕ.16-06-2025 ರಂದು 9ಾ ಸು@ಾರು 9.00 ಗಂ!ೆ ಸಮಯದ ಮೃತ
+ವ4 ರವರು 0ಾ 01 ರವರ ¨Á§ÄÛ ೆ.ಎ.10 ಇಇ 9976 D. .ಎE. 9ೇFಆ#
GೈI J ೊಂಡು ಗುಂಡು ೇ!ೆ ಪಟ-ಣದ ಮ7ಾ$ೇಶMರ NಾOೆಯ
ಮುಂPಾಗದ ಪ4QGಾRನ Jಂ 7ಾಗ, ಈ 7ೋ8ಾ9ೋಪ:ಾ ಪತ ದ
ಾಲಂ 12 ರ ಕಂಡ ಮು ಂ ಜ$ಾಂಗ ೆ/ 0ೇ*ದ ಆ9ೋ< 01 *ಂದ 02 ರವರು
ಮೃತ +ವ4ರವರನುS ಮ$ೆ>ೆ Tಾ U ೊಡಲು ೇ?7ಾಗ. ಮೃತ +ವ4 ರವರು
$ಾ$ೇ ೆ Jಮ>ೆ Tಾ U ೊಡGೇಕು, $ಾನು Tಾ U ೊಡಲ ಎಂದು ೇ?ದ ೆ/,
ಸ@ಾನ ಉ7ೇಶ'ಂದ ಆ9ೋ< 01 ರವರು ಮೃತ +ವ4>ೆ ¯ËqÉÃPÉ GಾW,
Tಾ U ೊಡು ಎಂದು Gೈಯು, ಮೃತ +ವ4 ರವರ ಮುಖ ೆ/ ೈ Jಂದ 2-3 ¨Áj
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
ºÉÆqÉ¢zÀÄÝ, DgÉÆæ 02 ರವರು ಮೃತ +ವ4 ರವರ ೊ!ೆ->ೆ ೈJಂದ ಗು'ದು,
ನಂತರ ಆ9ೋ< 01 ರವರು ಅOೇ &'ದ ಒಂದು ಕಲನುS ೆ>ೆದು ೊಂಡು ಮೃತ
+ವ4 ನ ತOೆಯ ]ಂPಾಗ ೆ/, ಗದ ೆ/, ಬಲ ೋ?>ೆ, ಎ7ೆ>ೆ, GೆJS>ೆ ಕ Jಂದ
ಗು'ದು, ಅಷ- ೆ/ ಮೃತ +ವ4 ೆಳಗTೆ &ದು ೊಂTಾಗ ಆ9ೋ< 01, 02 ರವರು
ಇಬ`ರೂ ಸಹ ಲb Tೇ ೇ GಾW JನSನುS ೊOೆ @ಾಡ7ೇ &ಡುವ4'ಲ
ಎಂದು ಅ(ಾಚ ಶಬಗ?ಂದ Jಂ' ೊOೆ Gೆದ* ೆ ಾd ಮೃತ +ವ4 ನ
ೊ!ೆ-, ಮತು ಎ7ೆ>ೆ ಾ Jಂದ ಒದು, ೊOೆ @ಾe 7ೌಜfನ (ೆಸ=ರುವ4ದು
ಇದುವ9ೆ=ನ ತJgೆhಂದ ದೃಢಪD-ರುವ4ದ*ಂದ DgÉÆævÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÝ PÀ®A
352, 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 103(1) ¸À/ªÀ 3(5) ©J£ïJ¸ï ¸À/ªÀ 3(5) ©J£ïJ¸ï &
3 (2) (V)( V-a) SC/ST POA Act 1989 zÉÆõÁgÉÆÃ¥ÀuÁ ¥ÀvÀæ
¸À°è¹PÉÆArzÉ."
14. According to the case of the prosecution, CW-5
Dayananda and CW-6 Kiran Kumar are the eye witnesses.
The alleged incident took place on 16.06.2025 at 9.00 pm.
Though there were eye witnesses to this alleged incident,
the name of the accused not shown in the First
Information Report. The Investigating Officer has recorded
the statement of eye witnesses on 19.07.2025 after lapse
of 34 days from the date of alleged incident.
15. At this stage, there is no explanation on the part of
Investigating Officer as to non-examination of the material
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
witnesses after lapse of 34 days from the date of
commission of offence.
16. Apart from this, the final opinion as to cause of
death, issued by the Department of Forensic Medicine and
Toxicology, reveals as under:
"FINAL OPINION:
On perusal of Post-mortem report, Chemical analysis
report and HPE report, I am of the opinion that the
death is due to acute cardiac failure as a result of
coronary artery insufficiency. However, the deceased
has consumed alcohol prior to death. Blood alcohol
concentration detected is 16.66 +/- 0.017 mg/100 ml."
17. The HISTOPATHOLOGY-REPORT reads as under:
"Microscopy:-
• Heart: Left ventricle, right ventricle, left atrium,
right atrium, bicuspid valve and tricuspid valve shows
no significant pathology. Aortic valve, pulmonary valve,
pulmonary artery, aorta and interventricular septum
show no significant pathology.
• Coronary arteries: Sections studied from Left
anterior descending artery shows atheromatous
changes with thrombus occluding 90% of lumen.
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
Sections studied from the Left circumflex artery show
atheromatous changes occluding 50% of lumen.
Sections studied from the Right coronary artery show
atheromatous changes.
• Lungs show parenchyma with congested vessels.
• Liver shows parenchyma with autolytic features and
fatty change.
• Half of each kidney shows normal histology."
18. The Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology
have also furnished further opinion at the request of Police
Inspector, DCRE Police Station, Chamarajanagara in which
the Assistant Professor of Department of Forensic
Medicine and Toxicology has answered the queries of the
Investigating Officer as under:
"Q. 1: The possibility of exacerbation of pre-existing
coronary artery disease by the circumstances of the
case as described by you in your letter or the
physical and mental stress involved in the described
scuffle cannot be ruled out.
Q. 2: In the absence of pre-existing coronary artery
disease, death due to cardiac failure as a result of
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
coronary artery insufficiency is not possible by the
physical and mental stress involved in the described
scuffle.
Q. 3: The injuries mentioned in the PM report are not fatal
and are not sufficient to cause death in ordinary
course of nature.
Q. 4: Cardiac failure is due to acute cardiac event as a
result of blockage of coronary arteries by
atherosclerosis, preventing heart from getting its
blood supply.
Q. 5: Death due to cardiac failure as a result of coronary
artery insufficiency is not possible by mere
consumption of alcohol in the Blood Alcohol
Concentration as detected at chemical analysis i. e.
16.66 +/- 0.017 mg/100ml."
19. On perusal of these materials placed before this
Court, it is crystal clear that the investigation is already
completed. The accused is not required for further
investigation. Considering the submission made by the
learned counsel for the appellant, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
it is just and proper to allow this appeal. Accordingly, I
answer Point No.1 in the affirmative.
Regarding Point No.2
20. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 19.09.2025 in
Special Case No.197/2025 passed by the
Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Chamarajanagara, is set aside.
(iii) Consequently, the application filed under
Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is allowed.
(iv) The appellant/accused No.1 shall be
released on bail on executing self-bond of
Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum
to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:43934
HC-KAR
(v) The appellant/accused No.1 shall not
threaten or tamper with the prosecution
witnesses in any manner.
(vi) The appellant/accused No.1 shall appear
before the Trial Court on all the dates of hearing.
(vii) The appellant/accused No.1 shall not leave
the jurisdiction of Chamarajanagara District
without prior permission of the Trial Court.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
DHA
