Anecdotally, I find about as many bugs in my Java code at work, as I do in my hobby C code, including "dereferencing null pointers" aka NullPointerExceptions.
Dereferencing a nil pointer in Java is not undefined behavior. It is defined; it throws a NullPointerException, and "it throws a NullPointerException" is a very specific term of art in the Java community that is very precisely defined.
Many languages don't have an explicit concept of "undefined behavior" in their standard (though, of course, due to deficiencies in the standard they may have implicitly undefined behavior), and of those that do I doubt anyone matches C or C++ in the commonly-used category of languages.
But in concurrent programs things get exciting again. Java would like to be somewhat fast on actual hardware, and the actual hardware behaviour of memory is exciting, so, Java is also exciting, depending on how your hardware works.
You won't get C's full-blown "Undefined behaviour", but you can get some pretty astonishing outcomes, for example time travel can happen. If one thread changes A, then B, then C, it is permissible in Java that from the perspective of another concurrent thread the value A is unchanged, after B and/or C have changed.
It turns out humans are bad at coping with this even though it's much less scary than Undefined Behaviour, and so some more modern languages than Java offer ways to get memory behaviour that doesn't hurt your brain as much in exchange for reduced performance.
Whether the bug was due to a well-defined or undefined behavior seems like an exercise in assigning blame to another entity (the language, the committee, the compiler, etc).
C doesn't trade performance away, so if you'd like to pay the price of these checks, it's on you, the programmer to add them in. C programmers have to put in extra effort to make the executables safer and output correct results.
Other languages trade off performance for safety and/or correctness. The programmers using them have to put in extra effort to make the executables run as fast as they do in C.
Ultimately, programmers tend to make rational choices, and the stockholm syndrome mentioned above is really just C programmers dealing with the consequences of the trade-off they made by using C.