- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100699 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT) BETWEEN: SHRI. NAGARAJ S/O. GADIGEPPA TEGGIHALLI, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. LIFT REPAIRER, R/O. R.M. LOHIYANAGAR, 11TH CROSS, BEHIND WATER TANK, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ. HUBBALLI, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-580024. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. T.R. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY HUBBALLI GOKUL ROAD POLICE, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD, PIN-580011. 2. SHRI. TYAGARAJ S/O. NEELAPPA KARIBHEEMANNANAVAR, AGED. 49 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. MANJUNATHA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-580030. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER IN CRL. MISC NO.450/2025 DATED 29.10.2025 II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT DHARWAD AND RELEASED HIM ON BAIL, THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 49, 61(1) R/W 3(5) OF BNS AND SECTION 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST ACT 2015, IN CRIME NO.145/2025 OF GOKUL ROAD PS AND ETC.,. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The appellant is arrayed as accused No.4 who is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.145/2025 of respondent No.1/Police for the offence punishable under Sections 3(2)(V) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19891 and Sections 109, 49, 61(2) r/w. Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20232. Brief facts of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant was working as a Real Estate Businessman living with his family members at Hubballi. Accused No.2 was looking after the Bull belongs to the complainant. Accused No.2 was also working as the driver of the 1 For short ‘ST and ST Act’ 2 For short ‘ BNS, 2023’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 complainant. It is alleged that, accused No.2 was having lenient behaviour with the sister of the complainant namely Netravati. Thus, accused No.2 was removed from the job. The accused No.2 had joined the hands with accused No.5 and both were having enmity against the complainant. 3. It is stated that, both were insisting the complainant to transfer three plots in the names of children of Netravati. Accused Nos.1 and 3 were also having grudge against the complainant. On 12.10.2025, the complainant was going to his land to see the Bull. At that time, the accused have followed him on the Scorpio car and dashed the said scooter to its hind side. Consequently, the complainant fell down thereafter, a complaint came to be registered against the appellant and others. The matter is under investigation. 4. Heard Sri.T.R.Patil, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Praveen Y.Devareddiyavar, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that, the appellant is innocent of the alleged offence. The date of incident was on 13.10.2025 at about 9:30 AM, however, a complaint came to be registered on 13.10.2025 at about 10:15 PM. The delay in registering the complaint has not been explained properly. 6. It is further submitted that, whether the petitioner was present at the time of alleged incident or not, is not forthcoming in the complaint. In fact, bald and baseless allegations are made against the petitioner in the complaint. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions, he will abide the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the appeal. 7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State vehemently submitted that, the accused Nos.1 to 4 in furtherance of the common intention, followed the complainant in the Scorpio vehicle and dashed him and tried to kill him. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 8. It is further submitted that there was enmity against the complainant. The petitioner was working under the complainant, he was removed from the work as he was having illicit relationship with the sister of the complainant. There is a clear motive to commit the murder of the complainant. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, he prays to reject the appeal. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint, it appears from the record that, the complainant though stated in his complaint that, Nagaraja Tegginahalli (accused No.4) had threatened him once that the complainant should not interfere with the matter relating to Nagaraj Chinchali (accused No.2). However, no complaint was lodged in respect of the said incident. 10. Be that as it may, on perusal of the complaint averments, prima facie it appears that, the appellant has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 made out a case for grant of bail by imposing suitable conditions. 11. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.145/2025 of respondent No.1/Police on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court subject to the following conditions; (a) The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. (b) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16485 CRL.A No. 100699 of 2025 (c) The appellant shall not involve in any criminal cases till disposal of the case. In case, if the appellant violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE PJ/CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9