- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1960 OF 2025 BETWEEN: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY AMBRUTHAHALLI POLICE STATION BENGALURU REPT. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU -560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R, HCGP) AND: 1. KAMALAMMA W/O THIPPEGOWDA, AGE 61 YEARS, R/A NO.60, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24 2. THIPPEGOWDA S/O KRISHNAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.60, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24 3. BHARATH KUMAR S/O THIPPEGOWDA Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.60, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24 4. SHARATH KUMAR S/O THIPPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT NO.60, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24 5. MALLIKARJUN, S/O LATE VENUGOPALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.49, 17TH CROSS, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24. 6. SHANKAR S/O KESHAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.60, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24. 7. H. S. KAMALAMMA, W/O K. S. KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT NO.60, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA NILAY, 1ST B MAIN ROAD, VENKATEGOWDA LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 24. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 THIS CRL.A., IS FILED UNDER SECTION 419(1) & (3) OF THE BHARATHIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA-2023 PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 21.03.2024 PASSED IN SPL.C.NO.577/2018 ON THE COURT OF THE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE & SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU, THEREBY ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AS WELL AS SECTIONS 3(1)(r)(s) OF THE SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT AND ETC THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT The State has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 419 (1) and (3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita-2023, (for short 'BNSS') against the judgment of acquittal passed by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Bengaluru, in Spl.C.No.577/2018 dated 21.03.2024. 2. Along with this appeal an application in I.A.No.1/2025 under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, is filed to condone the delay of 458 days in filing this appeal. This application is supported with the Affidavit of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 Sri.B.P.Manjunatha, Law Officer (Senior)(Criminal), SC-ST Opinion Section, Office of the Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations, KHB Complex, 6th floor, Kaveri Bhavana, Bengaluru-560 009. In the Affidavit, it is stated that the Special Case No.577/2018 was conducted by the Special Public Prosecutor of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Bengaluru. The certified copies of the Judgment was applied on 22.03.2024 and the same was received on 02.04.2024, which was sent for opinion on 16.04.2024 to the Law Officer (Senior), Bengaluru and the Law Officer (Senior), sent his opinion on 24.04.2024 to the Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations. Their office received the same on 02.05.2024. The Law Officer (Senior) of the Directorate has given his opinion on 06.05.2024 and the opinion file has been sent to Government on 14.05.2024 for final decision, since all have opined that the case is fit case for preferring appeal. The Government also opined the same on 06.02.2025 in its letter vide No.HD:4287:HCP-2:2024 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 by authorizing State Public Prosecutor, to prefer the above appeal. Further, it is stated that as the file was required to pass through so many officers and sections in their office and in the Government Secretariat before passing an order to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment, hence there was delay of 458 days in preferring the appeal. The said delay is not intentional but for the bonafide reasons. On all these grounds, sought to condone the delay of 458 days in preferring the appeal. 3. I have examined the materials placed before the Court. 4. The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Bengaluru, in Special Case No.577/2018 dated 21.03.2024. 5. The Trial Court has acquitted the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 under Section 3(1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST (POA) Act', for short). 6. Section 14A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, which was inserted by Act 1 of 2016, (with effect from 26.01.2016 vide S.O.No.152(E) dated 18th January 2016), reads as under: 14A. Appeals. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie, from any judgment sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts and on law. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every appeal under this section shall be preferred - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 within a period of ninety days from the date of judgment, sentence or order appealed from: Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of ninety days. Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of one hundred and eighty days. (4) Every appeal preferred under sub- section (1) shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal." 7. In the case on hand, the alleged incident took place on 14.04.2017 and the case was registered in Special Case No.577/2018 on the file of the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Bengaluru. 8. Since the offences are pertaining to the penal provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act, the appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an exclusive Special Court, to the High Court, both on facts and on law under Section 14A of SC/ST (POA) Act. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 9. Though there is a special provision to institute an appeal against the judgment of the Trial Court under Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, the State has preferred this appeal under Section 419(1) and (3) of BNSS, 2023. 10. In view of Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, this Court cannot entertain an appeal after the expiry of period of 90 days. In view of sub-section (3) of Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date of judgment, sentence or order appealed from. 11. In the case on hand, after lapse of 458 days, the State has preferred this appeal. Hence, the application cannot be entertained after lapse of 180 days by this Court. Even with regard to merits of this application is concerned, the State has not produced any acceptable - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52742 CRL.A No. 1960 of 2025 legal materials before this Court to condone the delay of 458 days. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) I.A. No. 1/2025 filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of 458 days caused in filing the criminal appeal is dismissed. (ii) Consequently, the Criminal Appeal is also dismissed. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE DL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24