SRUJAN GOWDA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The appeal is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
(BY SRI. S G RAJENDRA REDDY., ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHENNARAYAPATANA P S., REPTD. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
SRINIVAS MURTHY, S/O. CHIKKADOLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. #108, NEW TOWN SCHOOL BEHIND, CHIKKABALLAPUR, BENGALURU - 562 101. (BY SRI. M. DIWAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1: VIDE ORDER DATED 27.02.2026 NOTICE TO R2 H/S) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:12382 CRL.A No. 211 of 2026 HC-KAR THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
31.01.2026 PASSED BY THE II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.139/2026 AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (for brevity, 'the Trial Court') in Crl. Misc. No.139/2026.
2. The brief facts leading to this appeal is that on the basis of the complaint filed by the Srinivasa Murthy, the Channarayapatana Police have registered the case in Crime No.2/2026 against the accused for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Section 329(3) of BNS and Section 3(1)(f) and 3(1)(g) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 1989.
The application was filed under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail and same came to be rejected by - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12382 CRL.A No. 211 of 2026 HC-KAR the Trial Court. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Co-ordinate Bench vide judgment dated
07.10.1998, has allowed the RSA No.1058/1995 filed by the grandfather of the accused. At the stage, there are no sufficient prima facie materials to constitute the penal provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The rest of the offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the antecedents of the appellant, I proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The order passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru Crl. Misc. No.139/2026 dated 31.01.2026 is set aside. iii. Consequently, the application filed under Section 482 of BNSS is allowed. - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:12382 CRL.A No. 211 of 2026 HC-KAR iv. The appellant shall be released on bail on executing a self bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer, in the event of his arrest in Crime No.2/2026 of Channarayapatana Police Station. v. The appellant shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner. vi. The appellant shall assist Investigation Officer for his investigation. vii. The appellant shall not indulge similar offences. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The appeal is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2); Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 329(3); Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 1989 — ss. 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.