SMT. SHAZIYA BANU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BELURU POLICE STATION
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
The appellant is enlarged on bail on executing a
Provisions considered
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ss. 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 14(A)(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 s. 352
- SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 s. 18A
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Having heard learned counsels respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it would indicate that the complainant was working as driver-cum-conductor. The appellant was working as a Depot Manager at Beluru. There was a scuffle between them in respect of work…
Judgment
(BY SRI. GAURAV SUBRAMANYAM., ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BELURU POLICE STATION HASSAN, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU-560 001 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:38037 CRL.A No. 1577 of 2025 HC-KAR
SRI HARISH D S/O DODDAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS KSRTC EMPLOYEE R/AT KOTIGENAHALLI VILLAGE AREHALLI VILLAGE BELURU TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573115 PRESENTLY R/AT GONIKERE STREET BELURU TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT-573 115 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.PUSHPALATHA B. ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI.MURTHY D.L., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE DISMISSAL ORDER IN VIDE CRL.MISC.NO.690/2025 DTD
22.07.2025 PASSED BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE, AT HASSAN AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.164/2025 DTD
11.07.2025, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT, AT HASSAN. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38037 CRL.A No. 1577 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant seeking for grant of anticipatory bail for the offences punishable under Section 352 of BNS and under Section 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. Factual matrix of the case:
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant was working as driver cum conductor in the K.S.R.T.C Depot, Beluru. It is further stated in the complaint that he was denied work and also the allotment of route for his job. When the complainant went and requested the appellant to allot him duty, he was scolded by naming his caste and also threatened with dire consequences. Hence, he lodges a complaint. The matter is under investigation.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the complainant was not working properly and he was not following the instructions of the higher officials. When the appellant herein had asked him to complete his work as assigned by the authority, he has not only refused to work - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38037 CRL.A No. 1577 of 2025 HC-KAR but also scolded her. Therefore, there was a scuffle between the appellant and the complainant. The complainant by taking advantage of his caste deliberately lodges a complaint in order to implicate her in a false case. Therefore, she may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions.
Per contra, learned Additional S.P.P opposes the submissions and she further submitted that there are serious allegations made in the complaint against the appellant. The averments of the complaint would disclose that the appellant has committed the offence as stated in the complaint.
It is further submitted that there is a bar under Section 18A of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, the bail cannot be granted. Making such submissions, the learned Additional S.P.P. prays to reject the bail.
Similarly the learned counsel for the de-facto complainant adopted the arguments advanced by the learned Additional S.P.P and prays to reject the appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:38037 CRL.A No. 1577 of 2025 HC-KAR
Having heard learned counsels respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it would indicate that the complainant was working as driver-cum-conductor. The appellant was working as a Depot Manager at Beluru. There was a scuffle between them in respect of work allotment. Though, it appears that there are some allegations made against the appellant regarding adverse remarks against the caste of the complainant, the fact remains that, the manner in which the complaint came to be registered, would indicate that the appellant is entitled for the relief as prayed for. It is needless to say that the alleged incident had occurred on 04.07.2025 and 07.07.2025. However, a complaint came to be registered on 11.07.2025. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Criminal Appeal is allowed. ii. The
Operative part
22.07.2025 passed Crl. Misc. No.690/2025 on the file of Addl. District and Sessions and Special Judge, Hassan, is hereby, suspended. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:38037 CRL.A No. 1577 of 2025 HC-KAR iii. The appellant is enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. In view of disposal of the main appeal, interim applications, if any, shall also, stands disposed of. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The appellant is enlarged on bail on executing a
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — ss. 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 14(A)(2); Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 352; SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 — s. 18A.
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.