- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1362 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: 1. MR. GOVINDAPPA, S/O. BHEEMAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS. 2. MR. VENKATESH S/O. GOVINDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT VINAYAKA BEEDI, 1ST CROSS, GAJANURU VILLAGE SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 202. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. SATEESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TUNGANAGARA POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. REPRESENTED BY ITS, STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. MR. HARISH LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O MATHANGAMMA BEEDI, GAJANURU VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577202. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1 R2 - SD) Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER, DATED 21.06.2025, IN CRL.MISC.NO.532/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGGA. B. TO ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE APPELLANTS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL AND DIRECT THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE (TUNGANAGAR POLICE ) TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTS ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN CRIME NO.302/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT SHIVAMOGGA, FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S. 352, 115(2), 324 (4), 351(2_) R/W SEC.3(5) OF BNS, 2023 AND SEC. 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2) (VA) OF SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015. THIS CRL.A., COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellants-accused Nos.1 and 2 are 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.302/2015 of Tunga Nagar Police Station, pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 115(2), 324(4), 351(2) r/w - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 Section 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short 'BNS') and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, on the basis of the first information lodged by informant - Harish. 2. Heard Sri K.V.Sateesh Chandra, learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri Harish Ganapathy, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State. 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 appellants are 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. On the basis of first information lodged by respondent No.2, Crime No. 302/2025 of Tunga Nagar police station came to be registered against accused Nos. 1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 115(2), 324(4), - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 351(2) r/w Section 3 (5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Appellants being accused Nos. 1 and 2 are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail, since there is apprehension of being arrested. 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellants that appellant No.1 is the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.102 of Gajanuru village. The informant claims to be cultivating the neighbouring land. Only to pressurize the accused for terms, a false complaint came to be filed making baseless allegations. He further contended that, even according to the informant, the incident had taken place in a private land, not in a public place within the public eyes. Under such circumstances, provisions of the SC/ST Act does not apply. I find prima facie support to this contention on considering the allegations made in the first information. The nature of allegations does not require the appellants for custodial investigation. 6. In view of the above, I am of the opinion, that the appellants 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. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The appeal is allowed. The appellants are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.302/2015 of Tunga Nagar Police Station. The appellants are 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 appellants 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 appellants shall not commit similar offences; c. The appellants shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required; and d. The appellants shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25815 CRL.A No. 1362 of 2025 On furnishing the sureties by the appellants, 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 CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9