Shri Ashok S/O Umesh Madivalar Alias Agasar Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2233 CRL.A No. 100015 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100015 OF 2025 (U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SHRI. ASHOK S/O. UMESH MADIVALAR @ AGASAR, AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. CLERK IN DALALI SHOP.

¶7

SHRI. HANUMANTHA @ HANUMESH S/O. MARIYAPPA PYATIHAL, AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, ALL ARE R/O. VADDARHATTI VILLAGE, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL.

¶8

…APPELLANTS

¶9

(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH PSI, GANGAVATHI TOWN POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR ITS ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, B K Location: HIGH MAHENDRAKUMAR COURT OFKARNATAKA SPP OFFICE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.11 DHARWAD. 15:51:29 +0530

¶12

SRI. R. MURTHY S/O. AMAJAPPA @ RAMASWAMY AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/O. III^RD WARD, NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, VADDARHATTI VILLAGE, TAL. GANGAVATHI AND DIST. KOPPAL.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2233 CRL.A No. 100015 of 2025

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST ACT 1989, R/W 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.12.2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT KOPPAL, (SITTING AT GANGAVATI) IN SPL.C. SC/ST NO.91/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE PRESENT CRIMINAL APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS 1 AND 2 ON REGULAR BAIL ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMED FIT IN GANGAVATHI TOWN P.S. CRIME NO.147/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 103(1), 352, 351(3), 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) AND 3(2)(v) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015, IN SO FAR AS PRESENT APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ARE CONCERNED.

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

1. T he appellants/accused have been charge-sheeted for offenses punishable under Sections 103(1), 352, 351(3), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶22

2. T he prosecution’s case is that a complaint was lodged on 18.09.2024. Subsequently, the complainant filed a First Information Report (FIR) on 27.09.2024, alleging that her son was murdered by Accused Nos. 1 and 2. The complainant later learned that on 17.09.2024, at about 9:00 a.m., the accused came near her house searching for Kannaiah. As Kannaiah was not present at home, the accused allegedly abused him, his mother, and his wife

¶23

3 -

¶24

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2233 CRL.A No. 100015 of 2025

¶25

using filthy language and caste-based insults. At that time, one Hanumantha, a neighbor of the complainant, intervened and pacified the situation.

¶26

3. L ater that same day, between 10:30 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., in front of the gate of the Government School in the village, the accused allegedly assaulted the deceased Kannaiah. When one Basha attempted to intervene, the accused abused him and forced him to leave. The accused then allegedly took Kannaiah inside the school compound. The complainant later learned through Basha that the accused had murdered her son Kannaiah.

¶27

4. H eard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1State.

¶28

5. I nitially, on 18.09.2024, the complainant lodged a report regarding the unnatural death of her son. The prosecution alleges that CW-9, who allegedly witnessed the accused assaulting the deceased on 17.09.2024, informed the complainant about the incident in front of the Government School. Based on this information, the complainant lodged the FIR on 27.09.2024, alleging that the accused took the deceased inside the school compound and murdered him.

¶29

6. T he entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, which will have to be proved during the trial. The petitioners have been prosecuted primarily based on the

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2233 CRL.A No. 100015 of 2025

¶32

statements of CWs-8 and 9, who allegedly saw the accused with the deceased on the date of the incident.

¶33

7. I n light of these circumstances, and considering that the police have already conducted an investigation and submitted the charge sheet, the accused are not required for further interrogation. Therefore, the appellants have made out a prima facie case for grant of bail. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

Criminal appeal is allowed. The appellants-accused are enlarged on bail in Crime No.147/2024 registered by Gangavathi Town Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, pending on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Koppal, (Sitting at Gangavathi), subject to the following conditions:

¶36

a. Appellants-accused shall furnish his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶37