Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26834 (KAR)

SHRI H GANGADHARA v. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY

CRL.A/1308/2022 · 2025-07-11

M G Uma

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25555 CRL.A No. 1308 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1308 OF 2022 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: SHRI. H. GANGADHARA, S/O. G.M. HANUMANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.140/11, KEREGUDDADAHALLI CHIKABANAVARA POST BENGALURU - 560 090. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NEGLUR ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE REPRESENTED BY SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU. REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO 1.REVERSING THE ORDER DATED 12.07.2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE II ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.1125/2022. 2.GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER IF ARRESTED IN THE CASE THAT MAY BE REGISTERED BY SOLADEVANAHALLI P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 3 OF SC/ST (POA) ACT ON THE FIRST INFORMATION OF THIRUMALAPURADA VISHWANATH RESIDING AT Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25555 CRL.A No. 1308 of 2022 HURULI CHIKKANAHALLI, BENGALURU AND OR BY MARASANDRADA MUNIYAPPA, A RESIDENT OF KANSHIRAM NAGAR, BENGALURU AND OR RAMESH KUMAR R.RESIDENT OF KANSHIRAM NAGARA, BENGALURU, DODDA HOBALLAYYA, RESIDENT OF KANSHIRAM NAGARA, BENGALURU, MURTHY K.V.RESIDENT OF KANSHIRAM NAGARA, BENGALURU, RAMANJANAPPA.M., RESIDENT F KANHIRAM NAGARA, BENGALURU. THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR HEARING - INTERLOCUTORY APPLN, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant prays for time. The order sheet dated 10.07.2025 reads as under: "Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. No representation. It is noticed that the appellant is challenging the order dated 12.07.2022, rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Three years have already lapsed. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter. However, to afford one more opportunity, list this matter on 11.07.2025." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25555 CRL.A No. 1308 of 2022 Even though the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail was rejected by the Trial Court by its order dated 12.07.2022 and the same is challenged before this Court in the year 2022 itself. Till date, appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. On perusal of the materials on record in light of the order passed by the Trial Court, I do not find any reason to form a different opinion, as the Trial Court has assigned valid reasons as it was only a bald apprehension expressed by the appellant regarding registration of criminal case against him. No grounds are made out for grant of anticipatory bail that too after three years of the apprehension. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. In view of disposal of the main matter, IA No.1 of 2022 stands disposed of. SD/- (M G UMA) JUDGE SPV CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10