- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32220 CRL.A No. 863 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 863 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI.MANOHAR S/O CHIKKAMALLAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT CHIKKATHAGGALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GANESH G. G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY HOSKOTE POLICE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BANGALORE-560009 2. SRI.S.KRISHNAPPA S/O SADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT CHIKKATHAGGALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.V.ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R-1) R2-SERVED THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.05.2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, IN Digitally signed by SUSHMA LAKSHMI B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32220 CRL.A No. 863 of 2026 CRL.MISC. NO.899/2026; AND CONSEQUENTLY, ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.91/2026 DATED 26.04.2026 REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 298 OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023, AND UNDER SECTION 3(1)(t) OF THE SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SAID COURT PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the appellant who is arrayed as accused No.3 seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.91/2026 registered by Hosakote Police Station, Bengaluru District for the offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(t) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 298 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution is that accused No.1 is the son of accused No.3. Accused No.2 is his nephew. All the accused belong to Reddy community. The allegations made against them are that, all of them defaced the picture of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar with cow dung. Initially, a complaint came to be registered against unknown persons. During the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32220 CRL.A No. 863 of 2026 investigation, accused No.1 and 2 have been traced by the respondent - Police. Investigation is under progress. The statement of accused No.1 and 2 have been recorded by the respondent - Police. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is innocent of alleged offences, none of the witnesses have seen the said incident. The alleged incident had taken place on account of enmity between the complainant and the appellant in respect of small issues and also the property which is allotted to the wife of respondent No.2. Accused No.3 being the elected member of Gram Panchayat has questioned the validity of constructing a shed in the area which is meant for the villagers to put debris. 4. Appellant is the earning member of the family. He will abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 - State vehemently opposed the bail application filed by the appellant and submitted that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32220 CRL.A No. 863 of 2026 appellant has committed heinous offence against the portrait of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar who is known as the "Father of Constitution of India". Defacing such a veteran and eminent person is not only the offence committed against a particular person, but it is against a nation. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant relief as prayed for. Hence, the appeal may be dismissed. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint and further statement of the complainant and the eye-witnesses, it appears that there are prima facie materials made out against the appellant in the case diary made available along with appeal. Having gone through the said case diary, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant has not made out a case to grant relief as prayed for. 7. Having considered the gravity and seriousness of the offence, I am of the considered opinion that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32220 CRL.A No. 863 of 2026 8. However, the appellant is at liberty to approach the Trial Court for the same relief. If such application is filed, the Trial Court may consider the application on the same day, on merit. It is needless to state that the observation made in this appeal is only for the purpose of disposing of this appeal. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order and shall decide the case independently on its merits. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30