- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1026 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: SRI. SHIVA KUMAR .M AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS S/O. MAHADEVA SWAMY, R/AT NO.79, 6TH MAIN ROAD, GANESHA TEMPLE, BHAVYA BHARATHA LAYOUT, SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570 023. CURRENTLY RESIDING AT: KUMUDHA P.G., NO.10, 80 FT. ROAD, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 085. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. C.V. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SUBRAMANYAPURA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE. REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE - 01. 2. SMT. PALLAVI .S AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O SRI. SHIVA KUMAR .M D/O SRI. SIDDARAJU, NO. 725/1-4, SAI ANURAG, 6TH CROSS, 1ST 'A' MAIN, KHB SOCIETY LAYOUT, KATHRIGUPPE, BSK 3RD STAGE, Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 BANGALORE - 560 085. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1 SRI. H. MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.04.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-71) REJECTING THE PETITION IN CRL.MISC.NO.3145/2025 FILED BY APPELLANT HEREIN U/S 482 OF THE BNSS AND TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.151/2025 REGISTERED AT RESPONDENT POLICE STATION ON THE BASIS OF COMPLAINT OF RESPONDENT NO.2, FOR THE OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE PENAL U/S 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) OF BNS AND SEC. 3 AND 4 OF DP ACT, AND SEC. 3(2)(VA), 3(1)(R) AND 3(1)(S) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989. THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SC & ST Act’ for short) in the event of their arrest in Crime No.151/2025 of Subramanyapura Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 Sections 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act on the basis of the first information lodged by informant-Smt. Pallavi.S. 2. Heard Sri. C.V.Srinivasa, learned Counsel for the appellant, Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1-State and Sri. H.Mohan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record. 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the appellant is entitled for grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?” My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 4. The wife of the appellant has filed the first information alleging commission of the offences punishable under Sections 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 and 4 of DP Act and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act. It is the contention of the complainant that she was in love with accused No.1 since 2016 and they got married on 19.11.2023. She refers to few incidents that had occurred before marriage to contend that she was humiliated by the accused referring to her caste. She also states that even after marriage, she was not treated properly and she was humiliated by the accused. 5. It is pertinent to note that the informant is employee in State Bank of India and the appellant is working in GESCOM, Bellari. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the appellant is required for further investigation. Admittedly, accused Nos. 2 to 4 are already on bail. Considering the nature of the allegations and the relationship between the parties, I am of the opinion, that the appellant may be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution as well as interest of the complainant and the witnesses. 6. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 ORDER The appeal is allowed. The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.151/2025 of Subramanyapura Police Station. The appellant is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on their appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge them on bail subject to the following conditions:- a. The appellant shall furnish the bonds in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; b. The appellant shall not commit similar offences; c. The appellant shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required; and d. The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21475 CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025 On furnishing the sureties by the appellant, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the addresses and authenticity of the documents furnished by them. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to accept the sureties within a reasonable time. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE SPV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21