Sri. Reddappa Reddy Vs State by

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2043 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. REDDAPPA REDDY S/O K. KANNAREDDY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 31, 10^TH CROSS, VEERENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560049 PERMANENT:- GUNTALA, YAMBADI VILLAGE, RAMASAMUDRAM, KUDURUCHEEMA NAPALLIPOST, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH-517247.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. RANGANATH REDDY R., ADV.)

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE BY

¶14

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AVALAHALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE, (REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR), HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, PIN CODE-560001

¶15

ARAVINDA, S/O SRINIVASALU,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT BATTALAPURAM VILLAGE, CHOWDEPALLI MANDALAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDRA PRADESH-517247

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY KUM. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL SPP. FOR R1, SRI. MANJUNATH NAYAK, ADV. & SMT. SWATI L. KANAT, ADV. FOR R2.)

¶22

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT BY PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.06.2025 PASSED BY II ADDL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.928/2025 AND ORDER THE APPELLANT TO BE ENLARGED ON BAIL IN CR.NO.359/2024 AVALAHALLI P.S FOR THE O/P/U/S 103,238 OF BNS ACT 2023 AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

The appellant/accused has preferred this appeal

¶27

against order passed by the II Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru in Crl. Misc.No. 928/2025 dated 12.06.2025.

¶28

The brief facts leading to this appeal are that, on the basis of the complaint filed by Aravinda, Avalahally Police have registered the case in Crime No.359/2024

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

against the accused. After investigation, the Investigating

¶33

Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused for the offences under Section 103, 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶34

The appellant had filed an application under Section 483 of BNSS before the trial Court. The same came to be dismissed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 928/2025. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

¶35

The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, and there is no evidence as to the alleged incident. CW2 and CW3, who are the owners of the house belonging to accused No. 1, had not filed a complaint even

¶36

after lapse of 2 days of the alleged incident. Further, their statements were recorded on 27.10.2024 i.e., after 11

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

days from the date of the alleged incident also creates a

¶41

serious doubt in the version of prosecution.

¶42

CW4 is said to be the roommate of the

¶43

deceased, he gave information to the complainant, who is the father of the deceased, that the deceased had been to the house of the accused. Surprisingly, even his statement

¶44

is recorded belatedly after 11 days. The recovery of the chopper used for the commission of crime was not at the instance of the accused. Even if the version of the prosecution is believed to be true, the alleged incident is not said to have taken place because the accused had an illicit relationship with the wife of accused No.1 and not because the deceased belongs to SC and ST caste.

¶45

Further he would submit that the FSL report is

¶46

not yet received. The accused is in judicial custody from the date of arrest for more than one year. Hence, respondent police have invoked the provisions of SC/ST Act arbitrarily only to solidify the case of the prosecution, the appellant is entirely innocent of the offence alleged

¶47

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

against him. He has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of vested interest. The accused/appellant is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and on these grounds sought for allowing the appeal.

¶50

As against this, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned Addl. SPP have submitted that there are sufficient materials to attract the alleged commission of offences. The alleged offences are heinous in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life and sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶51

I have examined materials placed before this Court, on the basis of the complaint filed by Aravinda, Avalahally Police have registered the case in Crime No.359/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 103 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted

¶52

the charge-sheet against the accused for the offences under Section 103 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) amended Act, 2015.

¶56

In paragraph No.17 of the charge-sheet, it is stated as under:

¶57

PÉÃ¹£À ಸಂ�ಪ��ಾ�ಾಂಶ

¶58

¢ �ಾಂಕ -13/10/2024 ರಂದು �ಾ�� 11-30 ಗಂ�ೆ�ಂದ ��ಾಂಕ -14/10/2024 ರಂದು �ೆಳ�ನ �ಾವ 05-00 ಗಂ�ೆಯ ಒಳ�ೆ ಆವಲಹ"# , ¥ÉÆÃ $ೕ& 'ಾ(ಾಸರಹದು) ಘನ �ಾ+,ಾಲದ -ಾ+.� ೆೆೆೆ �ೇ/ದ �ೆಂಗಳ0ರು ಪ1ವ2 3ಾಲೂಕು , 5ದರಹ"# , 6ೋಬ" , «Ã �ೆನಹ"# , 8ಾ9ೋ:ಯ$; �ಾ� -7 ರವರ ಮ�ೆಯ$; , ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ. �ಾ>�ೆ�ೆ -ಾಸ-ಾ�ದು) ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ.ಯ �ೆ?ೕ@ತ�ಾದ ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è �ಾ9ಾGಯು ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ.ಯ 6ೆಂಡ� �ಾ� -7 ರವ�ೊಂ��ೆ ಮೃತ CೆDE �ಾ9ಾG ಅಕ�ಮ ಸಂಭಂದ ಇಟುE8ೊಂ>ರು3ಾ� ೆೆೆೆ ಎಂದು ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è , �ಾ9ಾG ಪ/MಷE ಜ�ಾಂಗ �ೇರದವ�ಾ�ದು) ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ.ಯು �ೆ>P ಜ�ಾಂಗ8ೆQ �ೇ/ದು) ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ. 6ೆಂಡ� �ಾ� -7 ರವರ �ೋ3ೆ ಪ/MಷE ಜ�ಾಂಗದವ�ಾದ ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è , �ಾ9ಾG ಅಕ�ಮ ಸಂಭಂದ ಇಟುE8ೊಂ>ರುವ RSಾರ-ಾ� ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è �ಾ9ಾGರವರನು? 8ೊ9ೆ Tಾಡುವ ಉVೆ)ೕಶ�ಂದ ��ಾಂಕ -13/10/2024 ರಂದು �ಾ�� 07-30 ಗಂ�ೆ�ೆ ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ.ಯು ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è ,- �ಾ9ಾGಯನು? ಮ�ೆ�ೆ ಕ�ೆ�W8ೊಂಡು �ಾ�� 10-30 ಗಂ�ೆ�ಂದ 11-30 ಗಂ�ೆಯವ�ೆ�ೆ ಮೃತ �ಾ9ಾGರವ/�ೆ >�ಂXY Tಾ>Wದು) ಮೃತ �ಾ9ಾG ರೂZನ$; ಮಲ�Vಾ)ಗ ಇVೆ �ನ �ಾ�� 11-30 ಗಂ�ೆ�ಂದ ��ಾಂಕ -14/10/2024 ರಂದು �ೆಳ�ನ �ಾವ 05-00 ಗಂ�ೆಯ ಒಳ�ೆ ,ಾವಗಲೂ ,ಾವ[Vೊ ಸಮಯದ$; ಮೃತ CೆDE ¥À°è , �ಾ9ಾG ರೂZನ$; ಮಲ�ದ)ವ:�ೆ ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ. ಮ]:ಂದ ಮ�ೊ�ೊ ಇSೆ^ ತ9ೆಯ _ೕ9ೆ ಕು�� ೆ ಯ ೆೆೆ _ೕ9ೆ ಎVೆ 6ಾಗು _ೖ - 8ೈಗಳ _ೕ9ೆ ಹ9ೆ; Tಾ> 8ೊ9ೆ Tಾ> �ಾ�W ಗುರುತು Wಗದಂ3ೆ 8ೊ9ೆ Tಾ>ದ ಮಚ]ನು? ಮಂಚದ ಬ" ಬ]ಟುE 8ೊ9ೆ Tಾ>ದ RSಾರ ,ಾ/ಗು �"ಯದಂ3ೆ ��ಾಂಕ -14/10/2024 ರಂದು �ೆಳ�ನ �ಾವ ,ಾವಗ9ೋ ,ಾವ[Vೋ ಸಮಯದ$; , ಮ�ೆಯ �ಾ�$�ೆ 5ೕಗ

¶59

7 -

¶60

NC: 2025:KHC:47359 CRL.A No. 2043 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

6ಾb8ೊಂಡು 6ೋರಟು 6ೋ�ದು) ��ಾಂಕ -16/10/2024 ರಂದು �ಾ� -1 ಮತು� . �ಾ� -3 ರವರು ಮ�ೆ �ಾ�ಲು 6ೊcೆದು �ೋ>Vಾಗ ಮೃತನ �ಾ9ಾG ರವರ ಶವವ[ ಎ -1 ಆ�ೋ.ಯ -ಾಸದ ಮ�ೆಯ ರೂZನ ಮಂಚದ _ೕ9ೆ 8ೊ9ೆ,ಾ�5�)ರುವ[ದು ತ:dೆ�ಂದಧೃಡಪDEರು3ೆ�.

¶63

On perusal of the charge-sheet, it is clear that the complainant is not an eyewitness. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. At this stage, on the basis of the arguments advanced on behalf of the accused, bail cannot be granted as the alleged offences are heinous in nature. At this stage, if the accused is released on bail there is a possibility of tampering or threatening the prosecution witnesses, and it will affect the society at large. I do not fined any error/illegality in the impugned order. Hence I proceed to pass the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

Appeal is dismissed.

¶66

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶67

KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Sri. Reddappa Reddy v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Reddappa Reddy v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Somanna Vs State by Rural P.S.

Manigandan Vs Gopalappa

B.N. Mithresha (A-8) Vs the State of Karnataka

Abhishek J R Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Siddalingayya R Hiremath Vs Sri Shanmugam S

Ramesh B Y Vs M R Winchu