The High Court dismissed the appellant's criminal appeal seeking bail. The court found a prima facie case based on the charge sheet and eyewitness testimony, noting the severe nature of the offence punishable by death or life imprisonment and the threat to prosecution witnesses.
Appellant removed from judicial custody; bail rejected; appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:46696 CRL.A No. 1621 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1621 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
HARSHITH P S S/O SIDDALINGESHWARA B.P AGED 31 YEARS R/AT, 6TH CROSS JANATHA COLONY KUSHALNAGAR, KODAGU – 571 234.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI PRASANNA D P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 SMT. MANORANJINI THOMAS KUNDAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
NC: 2024:KHC:46696 CRL.A No. 1621 of 2024
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.08.2024 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.276/2024 BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE KODAGU AT MADIKERI AND TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CR.No.33/2024 OF KUSHALNAGAR TOWN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302 OF IPC AND 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
praying to set aside the order dated 21.08.2024 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 276/2024 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, whereunder the bail petition sought in respect of crime No. 33/2024 of Kushalnagar Police Station for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the SC ST (POA) Act’) came to be rejected.
learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and learned HCGP for respondent – State.
Mantapa on his bike, parked his bike there, attended the marriage, had dinner, thereafter forgetting that he had parked his vehicle in front of the Kalyana Mantapa, came to Bar and searched for his bike. When he did not found the bike, at about 11.30 pm, when the deceased – Santosh Kumar was talking in front of the Bar over phone, the appellant - accused asked him about his bike and the deceased did not spoke to him as he was talking over phone and thereafter, when the deceased was going in a passage to washroom the appellant - accused started quarrelling with him and assaulted him with fist on his face
and took beer mug and assaulted him with it on his forehead, head and thereafter he broke the said mug by hitting it to a pillar and with that broken mug he assaulted the deceased on his neck. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the Hospital by C.W.8, 14 and 24 and the Doctor intimated them that he had died. Charge sheet has been filed against appellant - accused for offence punishable under Section 302 and 3(2)(v) of SC ST (POA) Act. The appellant - accused is in judicial custody and he had filed
NC: 2024:KHC:46696 CRL.A No. 1621 of 2024
bail petition and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order.
deceased with beer mug and committing his murder. Postmortem report indicate six injuries and the Doctor has opined that death is due to cut throat injury. He submits that there is prima facie case against the appellant - accused for the offence alleged against him. One of the offence alleged against the appellant - accused is punishable with either death or imprisonment for life. With this he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
International Bar and Restaurant. The deceased – Santosh Kumar was working in the said bar. There was a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant - accused with regard to non-supply of beer as demanded by the appellant - accused. The appellant - accused quarreled with the deceased, assaulted him with beer mug and broken beer mug on his face, neck etc., and caused injuries. The deceased succumbed to the injuries. Said incident has been witnessed by C.W.2 – Receptionist and C.W.3 – Room Boy of Kannika International Bar and Restaurant. As there are eye witnesses to the incident, motive becomes insignificant. Considering the charge sheet material there is a prima facie case against the appellant - accused for the offence alleged against him. If the appellant - accused is granted bail there is threat to the prosecution witnesses. One of the offence alleged against the appellant - accused is punishable with either death or imprisonment for life. No grounds are made out
NC: 2024:KHC:46696 CRL.A No. 1621 of 2024
by the appellant - accused for setting aside the impugned
order and grant of bail.
O R D E R
Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE
LRS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the grounds raised by the appellant for setting aside the bail rejection order are sufficient.
Whether a prima facie case exists against the appellant for the offence alleged.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Harshith P S
State of Karnataka
Latha B.S
Shivashankar Ammannavar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
