- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100191 OF 2025 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. USHA RANI W/O. S.V. BALAKRISHNA AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. TEACHER, R/O. H. NO.37/18, 4TH CROSS, NEHRU COLONY, BALLARI-583101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KIRAN ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD-580011 THROUGH GANDHINAGAR P.S. BALLARI. 2. SMT. K. LALITHA W/O. LATE VENKATESH AGE. MAJOR, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. KHB QUARTERS, BELAGAL CROSS, BALLARI-583101. 3. KUM. K. GOURI D/O. LATE VENKATESH AGE. MAJOR, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. KHB QUARTERS, BELAGAL CROSS, BALLARI-583101. 4. RUBY SEBASTIAN D/O. JORGE SEBASTIAN AGE. MAJOR, OCC. TEACHER, R/O. GOVT. HIGH SCHOOL, NEAR DURAGAMMA TEMPLE, BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.R. DESHAPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. ALEEM SHERIFF, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE SERVED TO R3) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C.1973 (U/S. 438 R/W 442 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO ADMIT THE PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF DISMISSAL VIDE ANNEXURE K PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE IN PC NO.01/2017 DATED 17.10.2023 WHEREIN P.C. IS FILED FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 3(1)(viii), 3(i) (ix) OF SC/ST ACT 1989, AND SECTION 211 R/W 34 OF IPC AND REMAND BACK THE MATTER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri. Kiran Angadi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State, Sri. H.R. Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and Sri. Aleem Shariff, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Respondent No.3 served with the notice and remained absent. 3. This Revision Petition is filed by the defacto complainant challenging the order dated 17.10.2023 passed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 in P.C.No.01/2017 by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, accepting the ‘B’ report. 4. The Office has not raised any objection. However, during the course of hearing, the maintainability of the revision petition was called in question. Therefore this Court heard the arguments of both sides on said aspect. 5. In order to appreciate the maintainability of the revision petition before this Court against the order accepting the ‘B’ report, it is just and necessary for this Court to cull out Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19891 which reads as under: “[14A. Appeals: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of CriminalProcedure,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. 1 For short, ‘SC and ST Act’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 (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 inforce, every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date of the 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.] [15. Special Public Prosecutor and Exclusive Public Prosecutor - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 (1) For every Special Court, the State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify a Public Prosecutor or appoint an advocate who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven years, as a Special Public Prosecutor for the purpose of conducting cases in that Court. (2) For every Exclusive Special Court, the State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify an Exclusive Special Public Prosecutor or appoint an advocate who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven years, as an Exclusive Special Public Prosecutor for the purpose of conducting cases in that Court.]” 6. On close reading of the above provision, it is crystal clear that any order passed by the Special Court is appealable under Section 14A(2) of the SC and ST Act. Such an appeal must be filed within a period of ninety days. Beyond the said period of ninety days, an application for condonation of delay is maintainable only upto one hundred and eighty days. However, if any appeal filed beyond one hundred and eighty days, such an appeal cannot be entertained at all. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:535 CRL.RP No. 100191 of 2025 7. In the case on hand, taking note of the impugned order and in view of the bar contained under Section 14A against the filing of a revision petition, this Court is of the considered opinion that the revision petition itself is not maintainable. 8. Accordingly, the following: ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM / Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 38