- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200163 OF 2025 (U/S.14(A)) BETWEEN: 1. BHUTALI @ BHOOTALI S/O IRAPPA JANGALI AGE 19 YRS, OCC STUDENT 2. IRAPPA S/O AMAGAPPA JANGALI AGE 35 YRS, OCC AGRI., BOTH ARE R/O KODACHI TQ. JEWARGI DIST. KALABURAGI …APPELLANTS (BY SRI B. BHIMASHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE, THROUGH JEWARGI P.S., Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 R/BY THE ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH, HIGH COURT BUILDING TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI-585102 2. MOUNESH S/O BHIMARAYA KAVALDAR AGE 19 YRS, OCC LABOUR R/O KODACHI TQ. JEWARGI, DIST.KALABURAGI …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP, FOR R1; R2-SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14-A(2) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.05.2025 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI, IN CRL.MISC. NO.668/2025 AND RELEASE THE APPELLANTS ON PRE- ARREST BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN SPL. SC/ST NO.65/2025 ARISEN OUT OF CRIME NO.297/2024 REGISTERED BY THE JEWARGI POLICE STATION FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) R/W SEC. 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST PA ACT, 1989, PENDING BEFORE THE FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the first respondent- State. 2. Though, notice of the appeal has been served on the second respondent, he remained absent. 3. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with the following prayer: “Therefore, it is humbly prayed before this Hon'ble Court to Allow the Appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge At Kalaburagi in Crl. Misc. No.668/2025 and release the appellants on pre arrest bail in the event of their arrest in Spl. SC/ST No. 65/2025 arisen out of Crime No.0297/2024 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 registered by the Jewargi police station for offenses punishable under section 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), read with Section 3(5) OF BNSS 2023 AND SEC. 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST PA Act, 1989, pending before the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge At Kalaburagi in the interest of justice.” 4. Facts in the nutshell for disposal of the present appeal are as under: 4.1 A complaint came to be lodged by the second respondent – Mounesh with the Jewargi Police Station, on 29.11.2024, which was registered in Crime No.297/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 351(2), 352 and 49 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, [for short ‘SC/ST (PoA) Act’]. 4.2 Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that on 20.11.2024 in Kodachi Village there was Jatra Festival of Sakrisaheb Darga; people who were gathered - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 were dancing in front of the procession and at that juncture in the rush, the complainant said to have pressed on to the leg of Bhutali S/o. Iranna. Complainant said to have apologized for having pressed the leg of Bhutali, but not satisfied with the said apology, Bhutali, who is the first appellant herein, said to have abused complainant by taking out his caste name and also in filthy language. 4.3 After so abusing, the first appellant herein has also slapped the complainant. Quarrel was pacified by the others, who were gathered in the Jathra Festival and in that juncture the appellant again took out the caste name of the complainant and gave life threat. 4.4 The police after registering the case, investigated the matter. 4.5 Notice was also given by the Investigating Officer under Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023. Appellants failed to appear before the Investigating Officer. As such, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 the Investigating Officer has filed charge-sheet showing the present appellants as absconding accused. 4.6 Request made by the appellants before the Special Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail was turned down by order dated 17.05.2025. Thereafter, the appellants are before this Court. 5. Learned counsel Sri Pradeep Kumar for the appellants reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal, vehemently contended that the appellants are innocent of the offences alleged against them and a false case has been foisted against the appellants, hence he sought for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. Per contra, Sri Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the second respondent opposes the appeal by contending that under Section 18 of the SC/ST(PoA) Act, there is a bar for entertaining anticipatory bail request and therefore, the very appeal itself is not maintainable. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 7. He would further contend that the appellants failed to respond to the notice issued by the Investigating Officer under Section 35(3) of the BNSS dated 14.01.2025. Therefore, left with no alternative, the Investigating Officer has shown the present appellants as absconding accused in the charge-sheet, which shows that the appellants are not the law abiding citizens and thus, sought for dismissal of the appeal. 8. Having heard the arguments on both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 9. On such perusal, it is crystal clear that there is clear and categorical allegation against the appellants which would prima facie attract the offences alleged against him including the offences under the provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act. 10. It is now settled principles of law that the bar under Section 18 is not an absolute bar and the Court has got the discretion in a given case if the contents of the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 complaint or charge-sheet materials would not make out a case, which would prima facie attract the offences under the provisions of SC/ST (PoA) Act. 11. In the case on hand, when such an exercise is carried out by this Court, this Court is satisfied that there are material in the case on hand, which would prima facie would attract the offences punishable under the provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act. Therefore, the embargo under Section 18 of Act would be applicable to the case on hand. 12. Further, the very fact that the appellants have been shown as absconding accused in the charge-sheet would also affect the case of the appellants from obtaining an order of anticipatory bail. 13. Hence, the following: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3692 CRL.A No. 200163 of 2025 ORDER The appeal is meritless and accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- (V. SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12