- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 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.729 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. K. SACHIN S/O KALE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI, NAGARALU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 175. 2. V.C. SRIDHAR S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI, NAGARALU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 175. 3. V.A. LOKESH S/O AJJAIAH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI, NAGARALU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 175. 4. NAVEENA V.E., S/O ERANNA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI, NAGARALU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 175. 5. SHASHIKUMAR K., S/O KUMARAPPA K, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI, NAGARALU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 175. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 6. RANGANATH M.S., S/O SHEKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/O NEAR RANGANATHA TEMPLE MELII HALLI VILLAGE, NAGARALU CHIKKAAMAGALUR TAUK-577 175. 7. DIKKESH B.D., S/O DAYANANDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT BAJANAAHLLI, MATHIGHATTA CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 548. 8. GANESHA @ SHASHANK S.R., S/O. S.T. RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT SANNENAHALLI YARADAKERE POST, KADUR CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577 548. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY SAKKARAYAPATNA POLICE CHIKKAMAGALURU REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. MADHU NAIKA S/O NANYA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT VADERAHALLI TANDYA VILLAGE KADUR TALUK-577 548. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P.YASHODA, HCGP FOR R1; R2 – SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT, VIDE ORDER DATED 17.04.2025) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.MIS.111/2025 DATED 14.03.2025 AND GRANT AN ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANTS IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME.NO.27/2025 REGISTERED BY THE SAKKARAYAPATNA POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2) 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 190 OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYASANHITA, 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) OF THE SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015. 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 appellants, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and respondent No.2 though served is unrepresented. 2. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that there was an incident earlier between two villagers and in that connection on 01.03.2025 at about 10.00 p.m., they went with an intention to pacify the galata, at that time, the accused persons suddenly came with club and started assaulting the complainant and abused them in filthy language and they made attempt to escape from their clutches and this incident was witnessed by others. Thereafter, they took treatment in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 Chikkamagaluru Government Hospital. Hence, case was registered for the offence under Sections 189(2), 19(2), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2003 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants brought to notice of this Court contents of the complaint which is placed on record as Annexure-B and also brought to notice of this Court that earlier there was an incident between two villagers and in that connection, they went to pacify the issue and incident has taken place and allegation against the appellants is that they assaulted with club and except making allegation that they abused in filthy language, no allegation that they took the caste name with an intention to humiliate the complainant party in the presence of the general public. Hence, Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 not attracts. Learned counsel would submit that accused Nos.1, 3 and 7 have already been granted bail and the Trial Court rejected the bail petition of these appellants and while rejecting - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 the bail petition of these appellants, it is observed that there is no reason to doubt the FIR and incident happened and also held that there is a bar under Section 18A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and no reason is assigned as to how it attracts the special provision and nothing is discussed in this regard. Hence, the appellants are entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State would contend that the fact that incident has taken place is not denied and though allegation is made that the accused abused in filthy language, but the fact that the complainant belong to particular caste is not in dispute and only with an intention to take away the life, the appellants assaulted and abuse was also made. Hence, the appellants are not entitled for bail as sought. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State, prayer is sought for anticipatory bail and also having considered the offences which have been invoked under BNS as well as special enactment and having gone through the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 entire complaint, nowhere the appellants have taken the caste name, except allegation of abused the complainant in filthy language and assault was made with club and taking note of the same, there is no ingredients of offence under Sections 3(1)(r) or 3(1)(s) of the special enactment and though offence under Section 3(2)(va) is invoked and the bar as envisaged under Section 18A of the special enactment will not come in the way of this Court to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellants. Having taken note of the omnibus allegation that the appellants assaulted with club, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court committed an error in rejecting the bail petition and the Trial Court arrived at such a conclusion based on the allegations and the averments made in the FIR and whether incident has happened or not is a matter of trial and discretion can be exercised in favour of the appellants having taken note of the accusations made in the complaint and no specific allegation against the appellants that they abused the complainant taking the caste name. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellants imposing conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 6. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following: ORDER The criminal appeal is allowed. Consequently, the appellants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.27/2025 registered by Sakkaraya Patna Police Station, Kadur Circle, for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 19(2), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2003 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The appellants shall surrender themselves 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) each with two sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. (ii) The appellants shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16467 CRL.A No. 729 of 2025 (iii) The appellants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and they shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (iv) The appellants 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. (v) The appellants shall mark their 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. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46