The Karnataka High Court has granted bail to a man accused of issuing a tampered forensic report in the death of a retired army man, holding that his alleged role is a matter for trial.
Dharwad: The Karnataka High Court has granted regular bail to accused No.10 in a murder case registered by the Ghataprabha Police Station in Belagavi district, noting that the only allegation against him is that he issued a tampered report from the government scientific agency to screen evidence of the crime [Kumar @ Dali v. State of Karnataka].
A Bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T, in an oral order dated September 30, 2026, allowed the criminal petition and directed that Kumar @ Dali be released on a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions.
Background of the case
The petition was filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which corresponds to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As per paragraph 2 and the operative order, the case is registered under Sections 103(1) and 238(b), read with Section 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Section 103(1) punishes murder, Section 238 covers causing disappearance of evidence of an offence or giving false information to screen the offender, and Section 3(5) deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention. The case is pending before the jurisdictional court at Gokak.
According to the prosecution case recorded in the order, the deceased, Sandeep K. Manjaragi, was a retired army man addicted to alcohol. His wife, accused No.1, allegedly took out a term insurance policy in his name by forging his signature and, with the help of accused No.2, planned his death to claim the insurance. After he suffered minor injuries in an accident while driving drunk, he was admitted to hospital, where accused No.2 allegedly administered sleeping pills and a poisonous substance through saline, causing his death.
The prosecution further alleges that, after the viscera was sent for forensic examination, an RFSL officer was bribed to issue a report stating that the deceased was not under the influence of alcohol on the day of the accident and that no poison was found. After accused No.2 turned approver and gave a statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, the police traced the alleged involvement of accused Nos.1 to 10. Kumar @ Dali was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. These allegations are yet to be tested at trial, and the accused are presumed innocent.
Arguments before the High Court
Counsel for Kumar @ Dali argued that he was innocent and falsely implicated, that the only allegation against him was issuing a tampered report from the government scientific agency, and that with the investigation complete and a charge-sheet filed, his continued custody served no purpose.
The High Court Government Pleader for the State of Karnataka opposed bail, contending that there was prima facie material on the petitioner’s involvement in an offence under Section 103 of the BNS and that he could tamper with prosecution witnesses if released.
Court’s observations
Examining the record, Justice Venkatesh Naik T found that the core allegations were directed at the first two accused.
“On perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the entire allegations are against accused Nos.1 and 2.”
On the petitioner’s alleged role, the court held that it could only be tested through evidence at trial.
“The only allegation against the petitioner/accused No.10 is that he issued tampered report from the government scientific agency to screen the evidence of crime. Whether petitioner/accused No.10 assisted in tempering with the report issued by the government scientific agency is a matter of trial and the same has to be established during the course of the evidence.”
Noting that Kumar @ Dali is a permanent resident of the address in the cause title and was willing to abide by conditions, the court concluded:
“Under these circumstances, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail with stringent conditions.”
Bail conditions
Besides the personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, Kumar @ Dali must not threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses, must attend the trial court regularly, and must not involve himself in any offence. A breach of any condition entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail. The order clarifies that its observations are only for disposing of the petition.
Why The Tampered Forensic Report Order Matters
The order applies the settled principle that bail turns on the specific role attributed to each accused, not merely on the gravity of the overall charge. Though the case is one of murder, the High Court separated the allegations against the principal accused from the narrower one against accused No.10.
Once the charge-sheet is filed and an accused’s alleged role is confined to the evidence-screening part of the case, whether he actually tampered with the report is left for trial, while conditions on witness contact protect the prosecution in the meantime. The court expressed no view on the merits.
Case Title: Kumar @ Dali v. State of Karnataka [Criminal Petition No. 102099 of 2026]
Neutral Citation: 2026:KHC-D:16308
Bench: Justice Venkatesh Naik T, High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad
Date of Order: September 30, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Sachchidanand B. Patil for the Petitioner; Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, HCGP, for the Respondent-State
