- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 561 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: MADAN GOPAL S/O LATE NANJUNDIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO. 46/1, BANDEPALYA, GARVEBAVI PALYA, BENGALURU - 560 068. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SOMASHEKHAR R.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY, BANDEPALYA, P.S. THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. 2. PRABHAKAR RAO S/O. LATE VENKATESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO. 1-7-139/12, S.R.K. RISALAGADDA, MURSHIDABAD, HYDERABAD - 560 020. 3. RAGHAVENDRA RAO S/O. LATE MADAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO. 1465, 17TH A MAIN, 2ND STAGE, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078. 4. INAYATH ULLA Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 HEAD CONSTABLE, RURAL POLICE STATION, SIDLAGHATTA, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 5. R. VIJAY PSI, SIDLAGHATTA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 6. VENKATESH (STAYED) SDA, DPO OFFICE, CHIKKABALLAPURA POLICE COMMISSIONER OFFICE, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 7. SIDDIQ BASHA @ SIDDIQ S/O. BASHA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NAGIREDDY LAYOUT, VEERANDAHALLI ROAD, GOWRIBIDANURU TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 8. JABEEVULLA KHAN @ JABI S/O. NYAMATH KHAN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT MASEEDI ROAD, GANGASANDRA VILLAGE, GOWRIBIDANAGAR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. Y.R. SADASHIVA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKKI MANJUNTHA GOWDA K., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI. B. SIDDESWARA., ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R8) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED DISCHARGE ORDER DATED 25.10.2024 PASSED BY THE (CCH 71) LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.399/2019 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the defacto complainant being aggrieved by the order dated 25.10.2024 passed in Special Case No.399/2019 on the file of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Special Judge, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') by which application filed by the accused Nos.1 and 2-respondents under Section 227 of Cr.P.C has been allowed discharging accused Nos.1 to 4 and 6 to 8 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 365, 506, 120(B) R/W Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(ii), 3(2)(vii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1989'). 2. Learned counsel for the complainant-appellant taking this Court through the records submits; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 (a) that the charge sheet material furnished by the prosecution established prima facie case of abduction and abuse in the name of the caste of the complainant-appellant making out a case falling under the provisions of Sections 341, 342, 365, 506, 120(B) R/W Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(ii), 3(2)(vii) of the Act, 1989. (b) That the trial Court without adverting to these aspects of the matter on a sketchy reasons and flimsy grounds has discharged the aforesaid accused persons. (c) That the accused No.3-respondent No.4 is the Head Constable, accused No.4 is PSI and accused No.5-respondent No.6 is SDA. That the accused Nos.3 and 4 have been dismissed after the enquiry arising out of very same allegations contained in the instant case and the outcome of the enquiry of the accused No.5 is still not known. (d) The trial Court has not adverted to these aspects of the matter, instead has proceeded to allow the application filed by the aforesaid accused persons, discharging them of the offences alleged. 3. In response, Sri. Y.R. Sadashiva Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for Sri. Akki Manjunath Gowda. K., learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the trial Court - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 has extensively dealt with the grounds urged in the application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C and has come to the conclusion of discharge of the accused Nos.1 to 4 and 6 to 8 in the light of delay in filing the FIR and non-compliance with Rule 9 of the Act, 1989. He submits that no grounds are made out, warranting interference at the hands of this Court. 4. Heard and perused the records. 5. The impugned order indicate that the trial Court has recorded the submissions of learned counsel for the accused persons and learned Special Public Prosecutor in extenso at paragraph Nos.7 to 13 running from page Nos.8 to 24. The only reason appears to have been given by the trial Court is at paragraph No.14. As rightly pointed out by the counsel for the complainant-appellant, there is no coherence in the impugned order, plain reading of it would not make out the grounds and reasons on which the trial Court is persuaded to allow the application. 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the accused- respondents fairly submits that the matter may require reconsideration at the hands of the trial Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 7. However, learned counsel for the complainant- appellant insists that the order of discharge is unsustainable and the same is liable to be set-aside. 8. In view of lack of coherence and reasoning in the impugned order, this Court deems it appropriate to remit the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration of application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C by the accused persons with the direction to advert to the grounds urged in the application and the material produced by the prosecution and to pass a reasoned order. 9. It is made clear, this Court has not expressed any view or opinion on the merits or otherwise of the case. Thus, appeal is allowed, solely for the reason of impugned order lacking the reason. Accordingly, following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed. (ii) Order dated 25.10.2024 passed in Special Case No.399/2019 on the file of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Special Judge, Bengaluru is set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21011 CRL.A No. 561 of 2025 (iii) Matter is remitted to the trial Court for fresh consideration of application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. (iv) The trial Court shall pass appropriate order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard for both the accused persons as well as the prosecution and the defacto-complainant. (v). All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35