- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16773 CRL.A No. 333 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.333 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. PALAKSHI @ PALAKSHAPPA, S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/AT CHI. KADADAKATTE, NYAMATHI TALUK, DAVANAGERE-577 223. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETAN DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY NYAMATHI POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU–560 001. 2. SMT. CHYTHRA, S/O SHIVARAJA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT MARIGONDANA HALLI VILLAGE, NYAMATHI TALUK, DAVANAGERE–577 223. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. M.G.KANTHARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16773 CRL.A No. 333 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.01.2025 PASSED BY II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT DAVANAGERE (IN CR.NO.200/2024) ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.485/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 191(2)(3), 329(4), 351(3), 76, 118(1), 115(2), 109(1), 189(2), 103(1), 352 R/W 190 OF BNSS, 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989, REGISTERED WITH NYAMATHI POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT DAVANAGERE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Court has already enlarged accused Nos.4, 6, 7 and 10 to 13 on bail in Crl.A.No.337/2025 c/w Crl.A.No.482/2025 and Crl.A.No.594/2025 and accused No.3 has also been enlarged on bail in separate petition. The learned counsel submits that all of them are similarly placed and only an omnibus statement was made against this appellant that he was there along with other accused persons and he is arrayed as accused No.9. The - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16773 CRL.A No. 333 of 2025 learned counsel submits that overt-act allegation is made only against accused Nos.1 and 2. 3. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 also not disputes the fact that overt-act allegation is against accused Nos.1 and 2. The learned counsel contend that they are all the members of unlawful assembly and went inside the house of the deceased, dragged him and committed the murder. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State submits that specific overt- act allegation is against accused Nos.1 and 2 and only presence of this appellant is stated in the complaint. 5. In reply to this argument, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that C.W.14 to C.W.16 have not stated the name of this appellant in their 164 statement. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, no doubt, this Court enlarged accused Nos.4, 6, 7 and 10 to 13 on bail in Crl.A.No.337/2025 c/w Crl.A.No.482/2025 and Crl.A.No.594/2025 and accused No.3 has also been enlarged on bail in separate petition on the ground that whether they have been part of unlawful assembly with a common object - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16773 CRL.A No. 333 of 2025 and in furtherance of common object committed the offence, it requires trial and there is no any overt-act allegation against each of them and particularly overt-act allegation is made against accused Nos.1 and 2 and the same is not disputed by learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader. When such being the case and when the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet is filed, the presence of this appellant is not necessary taking into note of the gravity of the offence, accusation and overt-act. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellant by imposing certain conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. 7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the appellant shall be released on bail in connection with Spl.C.No.485/2025 (Crime No.200/2024) of Nyamathi Police Station, Davanagere, for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2)(3), 329(4), 351(3), 76, 118(1), 115(2), 109(1), 189(2), 103(1), 352 read with 190 of BNSS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16773 CRL.A No. 333 of 2025 (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, subject to the following conditions: (i) The appellant shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. (ii) The appellant shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The appellant shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause. (iv) The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44