- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 214 OF 2026 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: SRI ARUN @ CHAMI S/O RAVI, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUTTAPPANA GUDI STREET, DEVANAHALLI TOWN DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT- 562110. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. LOKESH S G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY DEVANAHALLI P S, REPTD. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA, BANGALORE- 01 2. SRI. MARAPPA S/O MUNIMARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 102D, 362, PUTTAPPA TEMPLE STREET, DEVANAHALLI TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT- 562110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.DIVAKAR MADDUR., HCGP FOR R1; R2 SD) Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF REJECTION OF BAIL PETITION DATED 29.01.2026 PASSED BY THE HONBLE II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECAIL JUDGE, BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.2663/2025 AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY THE GRANTING BAIL BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.187/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE STATED THAT IS DEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/126(2),115(2),108 OF BNS AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s),3(1)(c),3(1)(w)(i)(ii) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The accused/appellant herein is before this Court in this appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by the rejection of his application filed under - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in which the petitioner had sought for grant of anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.187/2025 of Devenahalli Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(c), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(1)(c) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Case of the prosecution is that initially a case in U.D.R.No.43/2025 was registered on the report of deceased Ms.Varshini who was aged 19 years, died of suicide by hanging from the ceiling of the room with a saree on 12.12.2025. Later, from the CCTV footage recovered from the neighbour's house, it was found that the accused/appellant herein had intercepted the deceased, Varshini, while she was returning from shop. He physically assaulted her, striking on her face and head multiple times and humiliating her caste. He had also pressurized her to love him, respond to his phone calls and messages, and threatened her for ignoring him. The deceased Varshini had disclosed the said incident to her elder sister Vinutha, who had - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 tried to console her. However, the deceased had been deeply humiliated by public assault and caste-based abuse, which led her to take her own life by committing suicide. The complaint was however lodged on 16.12.2025 at 9.00 p.m., by father of the deceased-respondent No.2. Hence, Crime No.187/2025 came to be registered. 3. Learned counsel for the accused/appellant herein submits that the accused/appellant herein is an innocent and he is stranger to the deceased. The allegation of assaulting her is false and fabricated. There is no allegation of the complainant instigating the deceased to take the extreme step of taking away her life. As such, the provision of Section 108 of the BNS Act, 2023, does not get attracted, and as such, he cannot be held responsible for her death. However, the police have falsely implicated the accused/appellant herein in the case. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Special Court for grant of bail. 4. Learned High Court Government Pleader, in response, submits that there is prima-facie material against the accused/appellant herein that he was involved in the matter - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 resulting in her death. He also submits that the accused/appellant herein has been involved in some other case of serious nature. Besides, he submits that there is a bar under Section 18(A)(2) of the Act, 1989, for the grant of the anticipatory bail. Hence, he seeks for rejection of the bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the accused/appellant herein, learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the records. 6. Sri. Marappa-respondent No.2 is personally present before this Court. 7. Though there is specific bar under Section 18(A)(2) of the Act, 1989, for grant of anticipatory bail, the trial Court has rightly taken note of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rohan Jalal Vs. State of Kerala and others has held that exclusion of grant of relief an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. could not attracted if the complaint does not prima- facie indicate the case attracting the applicability of provisions of the Act, 1989. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 8. In the light of the above, even as rightly taken note of by the trial Court it has to be seen if the averments made in the complaint against the accused/appellant herein make out a prima-facie case. Though initially the case was registered as U.D.R.No.43/2025, on 12.12.2025 it was subsequently upon the complaint made by the respondent No.2 on 16.12.2025, the case in Cr.No.187/2025 came to be filed with specific allegation of accused/appellant herein waylaying the deceased on 11.12.2025 at 5.03 P.M., on his two wheeler on the bye- lane near the house of one Venkteshappa while she was returning home and physically assaulting her by his hand to her face, head and to her cheeks and abusing her in the filthy language in public. In addition, threatening her of her life with dire consequences, if she did not respond to his phone calls and messages. It is alleged that unbearable of said physical assault and humiliation, deceased had put an end to her life. It is further averred that though deceased had disclosed this incident to her elder sister Vinutha, fearing further clash, no action was taken as the accused/appellant herein had already been to jail in a case involving murder. It is further alleged that the aforesaid incident of accused/appellant herein - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 assaulting the deceased has been recorded in a CCTV camera based on which, the complaint was lodged on 16.12.2025 at 10.00 P.M. 9. The trial Court paragraph No.10 of its order has noted as under: 10. … Even CCTV footage submitted by prosecution in pen drive and played in open court in the presence of learned SPP and counsel for the petitioner shows that the petitioner / accused came in two wheeler at 5.04 pm on 11.12.2025 and assaulted the deceased Varshini thrice by hands while she was proceeding by walk. The prosecution has also submitted certificate under Section 63(4) of BSA in proof of said CCTV footage video clip. The counsel for petitioner has not disputed the identity of the deceased and the petitioner seen in the said video clip while it was played in open court. It is also not disputed that the deceased Varshini committed suicide immediately thereafter on 12.12.2025. Thus, there is proximity of time between the date of assault and date of commission of suicide by the deceased. No other explanation is offered by the petitioner as to why the deceased otherwise committed suicide. Thus, at this stage and on available materials on record, it is prima facie clear that the petitioner committed offence of abetment to suicide of deceased Varshini. Thus, at this stage, when the investigation is in progress, it cannot be said that there is no proximit, between act of the petitioner and death of the deceased. The offence of abetment of suicide alleged against the petitioner is also serious and grave offence. The delay in lodging complaint by respondent No.2 is properly explained at this stage. Therefore, there is a legal bar under Section 18 and 18A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, for grant of anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12454 CRL.A No. 214 of 2026 9. In paragraph No.11, the Trial Court has also noted that the accused/appellant herein is also involved in a murder case. The allegations made against the accused coupled with the prima-facie material made available before the Trial Court as noted in paragraph No.10 of its order, would make it clear that on facts the accused/appellant herein is disentitled for consideration of granting of an anticipatory bail under Section 18(A)(2) of the Act. Hence, the appeal is rejected. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16