- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 962 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI.PRASHANTH @ CHOTU, S/O. LATE THULASIRAMA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT C/O. SATHISH, NEAR PUSHAP P.G. NEAR GANESH TEMPLE, 3RD CROSS, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE- 560 048. 2. SRI.SRIKANTH @ BONDA, S/O. VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 282, 4TH CROSS, NEAR PUSHPANJALI THEATER, ANDHRA COLONY, A. NARAYANAPURA, BANGALORE-562 135. 3. SRI. VASANTH RAJ @ APPU, S/O. JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT BEHIND MARIYAMMA TEMPLE, AMBEDKAR ROAD, 7TH CROSS, GANGAMMA PALYA, BANGARPET TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 114. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. G.K. VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MAHADEVAPURA P. S. BANGALORE -560 048. REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. NAYANAKUMAR, S/O. SHANTAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 52, ANJANEYA TEMPLE BACK SIDE, RANHANATH LAYOUT, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 048. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SANDEEP C.T., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER IN CRL.MISC.NO.9149/2024 DATED 05.11.2024 PASSED BY THE HONBLE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-71) AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN CR.NO.208/2023 (SPL.CC.NO.1897/2023), FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302,201,120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC, U/S 3(1)(s),3(1)(r),3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, BY THE RESPONDENT P.S., BANGALORE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-71). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT Accused Nos.1 to 3 have filed this appeal against the order passed by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 71) in Crl.Misc.No.9149/2024 dated 05.11.2024. 2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that on 25.03.2023 at about 09.00 p.m. when the complainant and his friend deceased-Renukumar were proceeding on a two wheeler near Avaiva Gym, one Kishore, Prashanth alias Chotu and his two friends came near him and started to assault the deceased with long and choppers and caused bleeding injuries to the deceased and when the deceased fell down and they ran away from the spot. The deceased was shifted to the hospital, but he succumbed to the injuries. 3. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 8 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B), r/w - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellants herein are accused Nos.1 to 3 in the charge sheet. The bail application was filed before the trial Court on behalf of these appellants and the same came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by this order, appellant Nos.1 to 3/accused Nos.1 to 3 have preferred this appeal. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the respondent-police have arrested the accused on 05.06.2023. Since the date of their arrest till this day, the accused are in judicial custody. The appellants have not involved in the alleged crime either directly or indirectly. There is no overt act attributed against them and there is no allegation against the accused. The accused are charge-sheeted for committing the aforesaid offences. At the instance of accused, the Investigating Officer not recovered any materials. The accused Nos.4 to 8 are already enlarged on bail by this - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 Court. The deceased was the rowdy sheeter. Several cases were registered against him and there were several enemies to the deceased, somebody might have killed him. But the respondent-police have falsely implicated appellants in this case who are innocent. The name of accused Nos.2 and 3 are not found in the FIR. Accused are not required for further investigation. They are ready to abide by the conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. On all these grounds, he sought for allowing this appeal. 5. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 has filed objections to this bail application contending that the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of the eyewitness namely Padmavathamma, the mother of the deceased. Police have also recorded the evidence of other witnesses and conducted seizure mahazar and spot mahazar. There are sufficient materials to attract the alleged commission of offence against these accused. The mere release of accused Nos.4 to 8 on bail is not a ground - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 to release these appellants as direct evidence is placed by the prosecution. On all these grounds, he sought for rejection of this appeal. 6. The learned HCGP Sri.B.Lakshman would submit that accused Nos.1 to 3 have chased the deceased and committed the murder with long and chopper. There are prima facie materials against accused Nos.1 to 3. At this stage, if the accused are released on bail, it will affect to the society at large and there are possibilities of tampering of prosecution witnesses. On all these grounds, he sought for rejection of this appeal. 7. I have heard the arguments on both sides and perused the materials placed before me. The following points would arise for consideration. 1) Whether the appellants have made out a ground to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.9149/2024? 2) What order? - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 My answer to the above points are as under: Point No.1: Negative Point No.2: As per final order. 8. I have examined the materials placed before this Court. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail to accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 in Crl.A.No.631/2024 dated 26.06.2024, Crl.A.No.1508/2023 dated 10.10.2023, Crl.A.No.625/2024 dated 12.06.2024, Crl.A.No.258/2024 dated 27.05.2024 respectively. 9. On perusal of prosecution papers, it is clear that CW1 is the complainant and also the eyewitness. CW3 is also one of the eyewitnesses and she has identified the accused in the central prison in the identification parade conducted by the concerned Authority. The Investigating Officer has also conducted spot panchanama, inquest panchanama and seizure panchanama and seized the properties at the instance of the accused. The Investigating Officer has recorded the voluntary statement - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41506 CRL.A No. 962 of 2025 of the accused. On thorough investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the alleged commission of offences. The alleged commission of offences are heinous in nature. At this stage, if the appellants are released on bail, it will affect the society at large and there is possibility of tampering or threatening of the prosecution witnesses. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellants may be considered only after full-fledged trial. Considering the nature and gravity of offence, I do not find any error/illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. Hence, I answer point No.1 in the negative. For the aforesaid reasons and discussions, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 84