- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 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. 100723 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST ACT) BETWEEN: SHRINIDHI S/O. VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR, R/O. HOLEMUDLAPUR VILLAGE, KOPPAL DISTRICT-582114. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRAVEEN P. TARIKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH MUNIRABAD POLICE STATION, BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-01. 2. SMT. GANGAVVA F. BANGARI W/O. FAKIRAPPA BANGARI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O. HOLE MUDLAPUR VILLAGE, KOPPAL DISTRICT-03. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. MAHANTESH HIREMATH, ADVOCATE AND SRI. SADANAND M.K., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 SEEKING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION AND RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 64(1), 137(2), 352, 351(1)(2), 351(3) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2003 AND SECTION 4 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2012, SECTION 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w) AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT 1989 ON THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, FTSC-1 AT KOPPAL IN CRIME NO 200/2024 REGISTERED BY MUNIRABAD POLICE STATION AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29-9-2025 PASSED IN SPL.SC POCSO 70/2024 PASSED BY ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-1 KOPPAL. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 THIS 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 the sole accused seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.200/2024 of respondent No.1/Police for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20231 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 20122 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Bill, 20153. Brief facts of the case; 2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim is the daughter of the complainant. It is stated that she was aged about 17 years as on the date of the alleged incident. 1 For short ‘BNS, 2023’ 2 For short ‘POCSO Act’ 3 Fort short ‘SC and ST (POA) Act’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 The appellant was following her daughter by saying that he would like to marry her and also stating that he was loving her. After coming to know the said fact, the complainant had sent her daughter to Mundaragi. However, the appellant went to Mundaragi, induced her and took her to Holemudlapur and committed sexual assault on her by threatening her with dire consequences. After the incident, the appellant was scolding the complainant and the victim by using filthy language and also insulting them by naming their caste. On 08.10.2024 at about 1:30 PM, he has kidnapped her daughter on his Scooty, therefore she lodges a complaint against the appellant before the respondent No.1/Police. 3. Respondent No.1/Police have registered a case, after conducting investigation, submitted the charge-sheet. The matter is set down for evidence. So far as, the Trial Court examined witnesses, among them, the victim had also examined as PW.1. 4. Heard Sri.Praveen P.Tarikar, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri. Praveen Y. Devareddiyavara, learned - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and Sri.Mahantesh Hiremath and Sri.Sadanand M.K., learned counsels for respondent No.2. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant was loving the victim and both were loving each other. The appellant intended to marry her. However, the appellant was not allowed to marry the victim. In fact, after coming to know the said love affair, the complainant performed the marriage of the victim with her younger brother. Thereafter, the appellant had lodged a complaint before the Child Welfare Development Officer. Thereafter, the complainant was summoned by the Authority. The matter is pending before the said Authority for adjudication. 6. It is further submitted that in the meantime, in order to take revenge against the appellant, a false complaint has been lodged against the appellant. Though, PW.1 supported the case of the prosecution, there are some contradictions in the evidence of the complainant. Those contradictions are in favour of the appellant. Such being the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 fact, keeping him in judicial custody would not serve any purpose. Therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State vehemently submitted that PW.1 supported the case of the prosecution. There is a possibility of conviction. Already 04 witnesses have been examined, all of them have supported the case of the prosecution and the trial will be completed at the earliest. In case, if the appellant is enlarged on bail, at this stage, there may be chances of threatening witnesses and also possibility of hampering the Court proceedings. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant bail till conclusion of the trial. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition. 8. Similarly, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has adopted the arguments advanced by the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and he further submitted that the submission of the learned - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 counsel for the appellant is baseless and bald and the victim was not loving the appellant at any point of time. It is further submitted that the appellant had committed sexual assault on the victim on the ground that, she belonging to the Scheduled Tribes community. If the appellant is enlarged on bail, it gives wrong impact on the society and the community at large. 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 charge-sheet, it appears from the record that both the appellant and the victim were loving each other. The age of the victim is 17 years as on the date of the alleged incident. In fact, in the cross-examination, it is admitted that the appellant herein had lodged a complaint against the mother of the victim/complainant since, the complainant had performed the marriage of the victim with her younger brother. If that is taken into consideration, certainly, the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 age of the victim is disputed. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions. Those conditions would take care the apprehension of the prosecution. Accordingly, it is appropriate to grant him bail, as prayed for. 10. 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.200/2024 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 following conditions; (a) The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16565 CRL.A No. 100723 of 2025 (b) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail. (c) The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court 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:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11