- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.643 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. R. RAVIKUMAR S/O N.RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.153, BHAVANI KRUPA 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS 2ND APARTMENT MARUTHINAGAR, YELAHANKA BENGALURU – 560 064. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANKARAPPA S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH YELAHANKA P.S., REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. PRAJWAL S/O PRABHAKAR AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT S.J LAYOUT, HEMANNASWAMY TEMPLE OPP. BALAJI LAYOUT SRINIVASPURA YELAHANKA BENGALURU – 64. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P.YASHODA, HCGP FOR R1; R2 – SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 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 15.02.2025 IN CRL.MISC.NO.459/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-71) AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.006/2025 OF YELAHANKA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 115(2), 118(1), 352, 3(5) OF BNS AND UNDER SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(2)(5a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT. 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 learned counsel for the appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that though offence under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(5a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance 2014 and Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 is invoked against the appellant, the only allegation against the this appellant is that he was called after the incident and omnibus allegation against the appellant is that he also joined along with other accused and except the said - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 of 2025 allegation, nothing is found in the complaint that he abused taking the caste name with an intention to humiliate the complainant in the presence of the general public. Hence, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. 3. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State would submit that in the complaint, specific allegation is made that he took caste name and abused the complainant and specific allegation against this appellant is that he was called to the spot where quarrel had taken place and he also assaulted his hands and legs and that he was a part of assault made against the complainant. Hence, the appellant is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and also having taken note of the contents of the complaint, this Court has to take note of the material on record, particularly when anticipatory bail is sought, this Court has to look into the contents of the complaint. Having perused the same, except stating that this appellant was called to spot over phone and making allegation that he also assaulted along - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 of 2025 with other accused, an omnibus statement is made that assaulted his hands and legs, no specific overt act allegation against this appellant. When such being the material on record, no doubt, there is a bar under Section 18A of the Special Act in granting anticipatory bail and unless there is specific overt act allegation and specifically abuse is made by taking caste name with an intention to humiliate the complainant in a public place, the bar will not come in the way of entertaining the petition granting anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in PRATHVI RAJ CHAUHAN v. UNION OF INDIA reported in AIR 2020 SC 1036. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellant imposing conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. 5. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following: ORDER The criminal appeal is allowed. Consequently, the appellant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.6/2025 registered by Yelahanka Police Station, Yelahanka Sub-Division, for the offences - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 of 2025 punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(5a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance 2014 and Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a 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 concerned Investigating Officer. (ii) The appellant shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The appellant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (iv) The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission till the charge-sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16465 CRL.A No. 643 of 2025 (v) The appellant shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., before the Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge-sheet is filed, whichever is earlier. In view of disposal of the criminal appeal, I.A.No.1/2025 stand disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44