- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100704 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST ACT) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI AVESH S/O SHIVAPUTRA JIRAGALE AGE 24 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. AINAPUR TQ. KAGWAD, DIST. BELAGAVI 591303. 2. SUHAS S/O SHIVAJI LONDE AGE 22 YEARS, OCC. MILK VENDOR R/O. KUDACHI ROAD AINAPUR TQ. KAGWAD DIST BELAGAVI 591303. 3. SHRI SADASHIV S/O MALLAPPA KURUNDAWAD AGE 39 YEARS, OCC. MILK VENDOR R/O. AINAPUR TQ. KAGWAD DIST BELAGAVI 591303. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH REPRESENTED BY THE PSI KAGWAD POLICE STATION TQ KAGWAD DIST BELAGAVI 591223 THROUGH SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH DHARWAD-591223. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 2. VIKAS S/O. DADA WARE AGE 45 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER R/O. ASHTA VILLAGE TQ WALVA DIST. SANGLI, STATE MAHARASHTRA-416301. 3. SUDHIR NABHIRAJ GASTI AGE.48 YEARS, AT ASTA, TQ.WALVA, SANGLI, MAHARASTRA-416406. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. S.H. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOWED AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON DATED 25/10/2025 IN CRIMINAL MISC NO.1258/2025 BY THE III ADDL DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, AND THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1, 3 AND 4 MAY BE ORDERED TO BE RELEASED ON REGULAR BAIL IN KAGWAD P. S. CRIME NO.200/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3(2) (v), 3(1) (r)(s) SC/ST (PA) ACT AND UNDER SECTION 126(2), 190, 115(2), 189(2), 309(4), 191(3), 324(5), 352 OF B.N.S WHICH WAS CASE IS PENDING BEFORE THE III ADDL DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.Vithal S. Teli, learned counsel for appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader-Sri.Jairam Siddi, for respondent No.1 and Sri.S.H.Yadawad, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 2. The appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (for short ‘the Act’), seeking following relief: “Wherefore, the Appellants/Accused No 1, 3 and 4 It is most humbly prayed that the appeal under section 14 A(2) of the SC and ST (POA) Act, may kindly be allowed and set aside the impugned order passed on dated 25/10/2025 in Criminal Misc No 1258/2025 by the Hon'ble III addl district sessions judge Belagavi, and the appellants/accused no.13 and 4 may kindly be ordered to be released on regular bail in Kagwad P. S. Crime No. 200/2025 for the offence punishable under section 3(2) (v), 3(1) (r)(s), SC/ST (PA) Act. and under section 126(2), 190, 115(2), 189(2), 309(4), 191(3), 324(5), 352 of B.N.S which was case is pending before the Hon'ble III addl district sessions judge Belagavi, in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under: In respect of an incident that occurred on 23.09.2025 at about 09.45 p.m. to 09.50 p.m. within the limits of of Kagwad Police station, a case came to be registered in Crime No.200/2025. In the complaint, it is alleged that respondent Nos.2 and 3, being the driver and cleaner of lorry bearing No.KA-71/2045 was intercepted by group of 20 to 25 persons - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 and attacked the driver and the cleaner of the lorry by taking out their caste names and pouring diesel onto the lorry lit the fire and caused damages to the lorry, which was carrying beef in it belonging to Sahebalal. 4. After registering the case police investigated the matter and filed charge sheet. 5. Attempt made by the appellants to obtain an order of grant of bail is turned down by the learned Special Judge and thereafter appellants are before this Court. 6. Sri.Vithal S. Teli, learned counsel for the appellants reiterating the grounds that in the memorandum of appeal vehemently contented that the entire incident is a concocted incident and in fact a case is also registered against respondent Nos.2 and 3 for having illegally transported the beef from Belagavi to Kalburgi. 7. Admittedly, there was no license or permit for carrying and transporting the beef from Belagavi to Kalburgi. He would further contend that since the charge sheet is filed, continuation of the appellants in judicial custody is no longer warranted. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 8. He would also contend that per se having regard to the time of the incident and even according to the complaint averments, the appellants did not know the caste of the respondent No 2 and 3 so as to attract the offences punishable under the provisions of the Act. He would also contend that, at the most, the case would fall under other provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and therefore, gravity of the offence is reduced to considerable extent. 9. He would further contend that co-ordinate Bench of this Court in respect of accused No.2 has already granted bail in Criminal Appeal No.100701/2025 and the present appellants also stand on the same footing and therefore, they are entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. 10. Per contra, Sri.Jairam Siddi opposes the bail grounds by contending that incident is a costly incident wherein a mob consisting 20 to 25 persons have attacked the respondents No.2 and 3 and abused them and assaulted them and they went even to the extent of burning the entire lorry by pouring the diesel and lilting the fire and therefore the appellants are not entitled for grant of bail. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 11. Sri.S.H.Yadwad, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and 3, while adopting the arguments put forth on behalf of the learned High Court Government Pleader, would further contend that near registration of the case against respondent Nos.2 and 3 for illegally transporting the beef cannot be a ground for the appellants to get an order of bail and sought for dismissal of the appeal. 12. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the matter on record meticulously. 13. On such perusal of the material on record, it is pertinent to note that in the FIR itself, the time of incident is mentioned as 09.45 p.m. to 09.50 p.m. It is also stated that the place of incident is an isolated and lonely place and prima facie there cannot be any public view and in the night in a lonely place. 14. Moreover, the complaint averments itself would reveal that the mob, who attacked the lorry enquired the accused persons and they revealed their caste names and at that juncture they have used the caste name and abused them. Anyway, it is a matter that has to be decided by the Court - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 whether the provisions of the Act would apply to the case on hand or not during the trial. 15. Suffice to say that in the FIR, the incident said have been reported to the Kagwad Police Station at 08.30 p.m. when the incident has happened at 09.45 p.m. That itself shows that the complaint is a motivated complaint. 16. Be it what it may. Since the second accused has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and role assigned to the present appellants and the second accused are practically similar, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present appellants are also entitled to be enlarged on bail. 17. Other apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable and stringent conditions. 18. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The appeal allowed. (ii) The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in a Special Case No.681 of 2025 by taking - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:201 CRL.A No. 100704 of 2025 a bond in a sum of ₹1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum. (iii) The appellants shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner. (iv) The appellant shall attend the Court regularly. (v) The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Belagavi District without prior permission. Violation of any one of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE RHR/-CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 1