Criminal Appeal No. 1220 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1220 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2) …APPELLANT BETWEEN: SRI. I.R RANGASWAMY S/O LATE RANGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS BIKKODU VILLAGE, BELUR ALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 215 (BY SRI. M. JAGANNATH ALVA., ADVOCATE SRI. H.M. GIRISH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Legal Reasoning
BY ALUR POLICE STATION, ALUR HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 134 REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001 2. PALAKSHA S/O RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, BELLAVARA VILLAGE, PALYA HOBLI, ALUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 213 Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: High Court of Karnataka
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1) …RESPONDENTS This criminal appeal is filed under section u/s 14a(2) of sc and st (poa) act praying to set aside the order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the addl. district and sessions judge, hassan in cr.no.147/2025 which is produced at annexure-a and - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR grant him bail in crime no.95/2025 registered by the alur police/respondent no.1 against the appellant and others for the alleged offences p/u/s 115(2), 126(2), 133, 351(2), r/w section 3(5) of bns 2023 and u/s 3(1)(s), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r) and 3(2) (va) of sc/st (prevention of atrocities amendment act 2015. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant - accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 14-A(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.95 of 2025 of Alur Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 133, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of BNS 2023 and under Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r) and 3(2) (va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 on the basis of the first information lodged by - Palaksha. 2. Heard Sri M Jagannath Alva, learned advocate for the appellant and Sri Harish Ganapathi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on record. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned advocates for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the appellant is entitled for grant of bail under Section 14-A(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. The appellant who is arrayed as accused No.2 is seeking grant of bail. It is stated that he was apprehended on 17.05.2025 and since then, he is in judicial custody. Initially, the FIR came to be registered in Crime No.95/2025 of Alur Police Station against accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 133, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and under Sections 3(1(s), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), & 3(2) (va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. 5. It is stated that accused No.2 referred to in the FIR is one Ranganatha, resident of Hosakote, Alur Taluk, Hassan - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR District, whereas, in the present appeal, the appellant is one I R Rangaswamy, resident of Bikkodu Village, Belur Taluk, Hassan District. 6. It is alleged in the FIR that accused No.1 was claiming the land, which belonged to the informant and in that regard, a civil suit is pending before the Civil Court in O.S.No.128/2024. On 16.05.2025, at about 2.30 p.m., when the complainant was proceeding towards the Taluka Office, Alur, accused Nos.1 to 4 with common intention, wrongfully restrained him from proceeding further and accused Nos.1 and 2 abused him by referring to his caste, accused No.3 kicked the complainant, accused Nos.2 to 4 voluntarily caused hurt and accused Nos.1 and 2 threatened the complainant with dire consequences that they would take away his life, if he comes near the property. Thus, a complaint came to be lodged against the accused alleging commission of the offences as stated above. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that even though similar allegations are made against accused Nos.1, 3 and 4, they are already enlarged on bail. He drawn - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR the attention of the Court to paragraph 15 of the order passed by the Trial Court rejecting the bail to the appellant, while granting bail to the co-accused. The application filed by the appellant was rejected by the Trial Court only on the ground that the prosecution and the victim expressed apprehension that the appellant may commit similar offence or tamper the prosecution witnesses. The appellant is aged 72 years and he is in judicial custody since 17.05.2025. He is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. 8. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the appellant is having any criminal antecedents. No prima facie materials are placed to substantiate the contention that the appellant may commit similar offence or tamper the prosecution witnesses. When the co-accused against whom similar allegations are made are already enlarged on bail, I do not find any reason to detain the appellant in custody indefinitely, as the conclusion of trial before the Trial Court would take longer period of time. Reasonable conditions may be imposed while enlarging the appellant on bail. Hence, the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR appellant is enlarged on bail, subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the prosecution as well as interest of the complainant and the witnesses. 7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
Decision
The appeal is allowed. ORDER The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.95/2025 of Alur Police Station, 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. b). The appellant shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c). The appellant shall appear before the Court as and when required. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:21214 CRL.A No. 1220 of 2025 HC-KAR 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 HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7