Criminal Appeal No. 821 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 821 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: H P GIRISHA @ GIRI @ ENCOUNTER GIRI S/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO. 17, 1ST FLOOR, MIG, KHB COLONY, HOOTAGALLI, MYSURU - 570 018 (BY SRI. TONY SEBASTIAN, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
Legal Reasoning
SRI. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY METAGALLI POLICE STATION MYSURU CITY, R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SMT. RADHA .H. W/O LATE HANUMANTHU .K. @ BANGARI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.276, RAMAMANDIRA ROAD, BELAVATTA VILLAGE, RBI POST, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE - 570 003. (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1 …APPELLANT …RESPONDENTS SERVICE OF NOTICE AGAINST R2 IS H/S V/O DT.29.04.2025) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 26.03.2025 PASSED BY VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU CITY, IN Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR SPL.C.NO.85/2025 REJECTING BAIL TO THE APPELLANT AND ORDER THE RELEASE OF THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.85/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.138/2024 OF METAGALLI P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 103(1), 238, 351(2), 49, 61(2), 189(2), 190 OF BNS, 2023, U/S 3(1)(R)(S) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015. THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORALJUDGMENT The appellant - accused No.6 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SC/ST Act’ for short) in Crime No.138/2024 of Metagalli Police Station, Mysuru, pending before the learned VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru City in Spl.Case.No.85/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 351(2), 49, 61(2), 189(2) and 190 of BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 on the basis of the first information lodged by informant-Smt. Radha.H. 2. Heard Sri. Tony Sebastian, learned Senior Advocate for Sri. Reny Sebastin, learned counsel for the appellant and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on record. 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the appellants are entitled for grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?” My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 4. Respondent No.2 - the informant has filed the first information with Metagalli police against accused Nos. 1 to 12 and others on 22.12.2024 alleging that accused Nos. 1 to 8 have committed the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 and Sections 351(2), 189(2) read with 190 of BNS on 05.11.2024. It is also stated that in furtherance of the same, accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8 have conspired on 08.11.2024 to do away with the life of the deceased. Accordingly, on 22.11.2024, accused No.1 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR proceeded in his motor bike along with accused No.2, dashed the same to the motor cycle ridden by the deceased and later stabbed him with a dragger, as a result of which, he died. 5. Column No.17 of the charge sheet makes it clear that the appellant was involved in commission of the offence as alleged on 05.11.2024, but no complaint was filed pursuant to the same. It was only on 22.12.2024, when accused No.1 stabbed the deceased with the dragger and caused his death, the first information came to be filed. However, there is no reference to the present appellant being part of the criminal conspiracy with the co-accused or being part of causing the death of the deceased. 6. It is stated that except accused No.1, who is the assailant, all other accused are already enlarged on bail. The bail application filed by the appellant was rejected solely on the ground that, he is having criminal antecedents. Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant submits that out of 13 cases noted in the order passed by the Trial Court, in 8 cases the appellant is already acquitted. In one of the cases, B-report is filed. In other four cases, the trial is in progress before the Trial Court. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR 7. Even though serious allegations are made against the accused, specific overt act of causing the death of the deceased was by accused No.1 in the presence of accused No.2. Conspiracy to cause death of the deceased was by accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion, that the appellant may be granted bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution as well as interest of the complainant and the witnesses. 8. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
Decision
ORDER The appeal is allowed. The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.138/2024 of Metagalli Police Station, Mysuru, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: a). The appellant shall not commit similar offences. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:19415 CRL.A No. 821 of 2025 HC-KAR b). The appellant shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c). The appellant shall appear before the Court as and when required. If in case, the appellant violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail. On furnishing the sureties by the appellant, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the appellant and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the appellant on bail. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE SPV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42