- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100761 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT) BETWEEN: PRAMOD S/O. YALLAPPA KAVATAKOPP, AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/BUSINESS, R/O. JAIBHIM NAGAR, SHAMANEWADI, TQ. CHIKKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591214. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAM P.GHORPADE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANTOSH S.HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SADALAGA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-11. 2. SRI. DEVARAJ S/O. SADASHIV JIRAGE, AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. PAINTER, R/O. AT BEDAKIHAL, TQ. NIPPANI, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 DIST. BELAGAVI-591214. 3. SWAPNIL RAJARAM YADAV, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. PAINTER, R/O. BEDAKIHAL, TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591214. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT 2015, PRAYING TO, DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE TO ENLARGE THE ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.146/2025 OF SADALAGA POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BELAGLAVI, FOR THE OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER SECTIONS 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) OF BNS R/W SECTION 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(V-A) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT 1989. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The appellant is before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.146/2025 of respondent No.1-Police for the offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS 2023’) and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC and ST Act’). Factual matrix of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, a complaint came to be filed by Devaraja Sadashiva Jirage stating that, on 21.10.2025 at about 10.30 p.m., when the complainant and his friend Swapnil Rajaram Yadav were standing near the pan shop situated in front of Arihant Hospital, Promod Yellappa and Shubam Arun Yadav started quarrelling with them. In the meantime, the complainant and other persons pacified the matter and sent them away from the place. After the said incident, around 11.30 p.m., the complainant and his friend, Swapnil Rajaram Yadav were standing in front of one house. At - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 that time, the above said persons, namely, Pramod and Shubam came and asked them as to why they had pacified the matter when they were quarrelling with other persons and started assaulting and abusing in filthy language by naming their caste. Pramod had attempted to stab the complainant with a knife. However, the complainant escaped. During the said process, the complainant had sustained injuries on the chest, neck and left hand. In the meantime, both accused had assaulted the friend of the complainant and caused injuries to his right hand and near his nose. Thereafter, they went away from the spot. Hence, the complaint. 3. Heard Sri.Ram.P.Ghorpade and Sri.Santosh S.Hattikatagi, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. Praveena Y.Devareddiyava, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 – State. 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent of the alleged offences. The entire allegations made in the complaint, even if it is taken on face value, would not disclose the commission of any offence. The appellant has not scolded by naming the caste. No independent witnesses have stated about the said scolding. In - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 fact, the injured has been discharged from the hospital on 21.10.2025 and he is out of danger. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 – State vehemently submitted that the appellant and another not only have scolded the complainant and his friend by naming the caste, but also, assaulted indiscriminately and caused severe injuries. The intention to commit murder of the complainant and his friend is very clear. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant them bail. In case, if bail is granted, there may be chances of committing similar offences, and also chances of threatening prosecution witnesses. Hence, the bail has to be rejected. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint, it would indicate that the appellant and his friend have scolded the complainant and his friend by naming the caste. When such being the fact, there is a bar under Section 18-A of the SC and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18399 CRL.A No. 100761 of 2025 ST (POA) Act. Under such circumstances, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that, the appellant has not made out a case to grant the relief as prayed for. Accordingly, the appeal stands rejected. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE PJ/UN CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23