CRL.A/100702/2025 of PRATHAMESH S/O CHANDRAKANTH BANAJAWAD Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 30 January 2026

ORDER

PASSED ON DATED 25/10/2025 IN CRIMINAL MISC NO.1270/2025 BY THE III ADDL. DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, AND THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.5 AND 6 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 III ADDL DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 19.12.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF

JUDGMENT

THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

The appellants herein are arraigned as accused Nos.5 and 6 before the Trial Court. They are seeking for regular bail in Crime No.200/2025 filed by the respondent-Police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 and under Sections 126(2), 190, 115(2), 189(2) , 309(4), 191(3), 324(5), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘BNS 2023’). Factual matrix of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.09.2025 at about 4.00 p.m. one Sahebalal called the complainant along with his friend Sudhir Nabhiraj Gasti for driving work. The complainant along with his friend went to Kudachi Village and met Sahebalal. The said Sahebalal entrusted the work of transporting the meat of the cattle and to go to Gulbarga. The complainant and his friend after taking the truck loaded with meat went near Ugarkha Town on the way to Ainapura Village and reached near Basaweshwar Hotel. There 20 to 25 people came and stopped the truck and started abusing the complainant and his friend in a filthy language. At that time, the people asked the complainant and told to unload the meat of cattle. They enquired the caste of the complainant and abused them in a filthy language. Hence, this complaint.

3. Heard Smt.Priyanka Pawar, learned counsel appearing for Sri. Adiveppa K. Ingale, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri. Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. Shadab H. Yadawad, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that, the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. No specific overt-act is attributed against the appellants. As per the averments of the complaint and the First Information Report, a group of 20-25 people restrained the complainant and his friend. Further, it is alleged that they stopped the lorry and scolded them by naming their caste and also they had assaulted. However, the names of the appellants had been forthcoming on the basis of the statements of the co-accused. In fact, the appellants have been unnecessarily dragged into the proceedings and they have been remanded to judicial custody, which is an abuse of process of law. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail by imposing the suitable conditions.

Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the appellants prays to allow the appeal.

5. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 vehemently submitted that, the appellants and others with an intention to commit the offences stated supra had stopped the vehicle and scolded them by naming their caste, insulted and degraded them in public view and also assaulted them. During the investigation, the appellants and others are stated to have scolded the complainant and others by naming their caste and also assaulted them and caused injuries. Therefore, they are not entitled for the relief as prayed for. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent prays to reject the appeal.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint, it appears that, the appellants herein have been arrayed as accused Nos.5 and 6. However, there is no whisper as to how they have been implicated in this case. Moreover, the First Information Report has been filed against unknown persons. No identification parade has been conducted to demonstrate that these appellants were present at the time of the alleged incident. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that the appeal has to be allowed.

7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

i. This Criminal Appeal is allowed. ii. The appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.200/2025 of respondent-Police for the offences punishable under Section 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act) and under Sections 126(2), 190, 115(2), 189(2), 309(4), 191(3), 324(5), 352 of BNS, 2023, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each, with one surety each, to the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court. iii. The appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses or hamper the proceedings of the Court.

iv. The appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates, without fail. v. The appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall not indulge in any similar offences till disposal of the case.

In case, if, the appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.

Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

NM