- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200045 OF 2025 [U/S 14 (A)] BETWEEN: LINGARAJU S/O BASAVANAPPA NIMBURE, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NIRNAWADI, TQ. CHITGUPPA, BIDAR-585412. …APPELLANT (BY SRI VISHAL PRATAP SINGH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE, THROUGH MANNAEKHELLI PS, CHITGUPPA DIST. BIDAR REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT KALABURAGI BENCH, KALABURAGI-585412. 2. NEELKANTH S/O MALLIKARJUN RAJGIRE, AGE: 19 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NIRNAWADI TQ. CHITAGUPPA, BIDAR-585412. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI YASHA S. DIKSHIT, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14-A (2) OF THE SC/ST (PA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2024 IN CRL.MISC.NO.5158/2024 AND TO GRANT THE RELIEF OF REGULAR BAIL TO THE APPELLANT ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.5/2024 REGISTERED BY THE MANNEKHALLI PS, BIDAR AND CHARGED WITH OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 324, 302, 504, 506 READ WITH 149 OF THE IPC A/W S 3(2)(V) AND 3(2)(VA) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the appellant/accused No.1 under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Act, 1989 for granting bail by setting aside the order of dismissal of bail application dated 24.07.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.5158/2024 filed by the appellant. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State and also learned counsel for respondent No.2 - complainant. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 3. On the complaint of respondent No.2, the Mannaekhelli police registered FIR in Crime No.5/2024 against the petitioner and 9 others for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307 324, 341, 504 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PA) Act. 4. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.01.2024 at about 3.30 p.m., at the request of accused No.1 the officers of the Survey Department had arrived at the disputed property for the purpose of conducting survey. Since the deceased did not agree for conducting survey the officers of the Survey Department had left the spot. Thereafter, the accused persons tried to remove the boundary stones from the property in dispute and this was objected to by the deceased. The accused persons, who were armed with weapons, started abusing the deceased and accused No.1/appellant is alleged to have assaulted the deceased on his head with an axe, accused No.2 is alleged to have assaulted the deceased on his left hand - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 with a dragger and accused No.4 is alleged to have assaulted the deceased on his left hand with a spade. When CW-1 and CW-16 tried to interfere, other accused persons allegedly assaulted them. As a result of the assault made on the deceased, he succumbed to the injuries at the spot. 5. After registering the FIR, police arrested the appellant on 11.01.2024. He was remanded to judicial custody. His bail petition came to be rejected by the Trial Court vide impugned order dated 24.07.2024. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the appellant is in judicial custody for almost 1 year 2 months. The accused Nos.2 to 4 are already granted bail by the Co-ordinate bench of this Court. The trial is yet to begin. Charges were framed and it is not possible to conclude the trial in near future. Therefore, he prays for granting bail. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1/State objecting the appeal contended that appellant/ accused No.1 has assaulted the deceased on his head with an axe and due to this assault, the death has occurred. As per the postmortem report the death is due to head injury. He further submits that if the appellant is granted bail, he would tamper the eyewitnesses and threaten them. Hence, he prayed for dismissing the appeal. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/ complainant seriously objected the appeal contending that because of the assault of this appellant the death has occurred. The other accused have assaulted the deceased on hands, which would not lead to death. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled for bail. CWs-1, 6, 9, 17 to 22 are the eyewitnesses cited in the charge sheet. Hence, the appellant is not entitled for bail and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 9. I have heard the arguments and perused the records. Admittedly, the Co-ordinate bench has granted bail to accused No.2 in Criminal Petition No.200169/2024 dated 15.07.2024. On the basis of bail granted to accused No.2, accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 10 approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.200223/2024 and connected matters and the Co-ordinate bench granted them bail on 25.09.2024. This appellant is in judicial custody from 1 year 2 months. On careful reading of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate bench, it is categorically observed that the main allegation is against accused No.1/appellant who has assaulted the deceased on his head which caused head injury and due to which the death has occurred. By observing so, the co-ordinate bench granted bail to accused No.2. Even while granting bail to other accused, the co-ordinate bench has made similar observation. The postmortem report also reveals cause of death was due to head injury. The overt acts against the other accused who are granted bail is that of assault on the hands of the deceased, which do not lead to death. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 10. During the course of argument it is contended that there was no intention of the accused to commit the murder of the deceased. Even if it is considered that for surveying the land the accused were possessing the weapons, the question of carrying the axe by the accused persons does not arise, as it is the duty of the Survey Department to bring the material to measure the land and fix the boundaries. Such being the case, at this stage it cannot be considered that there was no intention of the appellant to commit the murder. Therefore, I am of the view that when CWs-1, 6, 9, 17 to 22 are cited as eyewitnesses and CW-1 and CW-16 being the injured eyewitnesses, there is every possibility of the appellant tampering the eyewitnesses and injured persons, and the same cannot be ruled out. Until examination of material witnesses, this appellant is not entitled for bail. 11. The Trial Court, considering the facts and circumstances, has rightly rejected the bail application of - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1397 CRL.A No. 200045 of 2025 the appellant. Therefore, the same does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Liberty is granted to the appellant to approach the Trial Court after examination of the material witnesses and the Trial Court shall consider the same. Sd/- (K NATARAJAN) JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3 CT:SI