Abhishek J R Vs State of Karnataka

2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.10.2025, PASSED BY 2ND ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION COURT, BANGALORE RURAL DIST, BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC. NO. 1826/2025 AND RELEASE THE APPELLANT IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN CRIME NO.259/2025 OF HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(w), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) OF SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT 2015 AND UNDER SECTION 69, 115(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352, 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING BEFORE THE 2^ND ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION COURT, BANGALORE RURAL DIST, BANGALORE.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:47254 CRL.A No. 2176 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

The appellant/accused No.1 has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.1826/2025 dated 23.10.2025.

¶30

Brief facts leading to this appeal are that on the basis of the complaint filed by the informant, Hosakote Police Station have registered a case in Crime No.259/2025 against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(w), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC & ST (POA) Act’) and under Sections 69, 115(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS 2023’).

¶31

Both the accused have filed petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest. The trial Court has rejected the bail petition against this appellant and allowed the petition against

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:47254 CRL.A No. 2176 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

accused No.2. Being aggrieved by the rejection of bail petition, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

¶36

Sri.Tomy Sebastian, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the averments made in the complaint do not indicate that promise of marriage made by accused No.1 was false from inception or that the complainant engaged in a sexual relationship solely on the basis of a such promise. It is the specific case of the prosecution that relationship between the appellant and the respondent No.2 did not culminate in marriage owing to differences relating to her caste. The entire crux of the complaint revolves around the cancellation of the proposed marriage and it appears that being aggrieved by the same, the complainant has resorted to filing the present complaint.

¶37

Further, it is submitted that the trial Court had granted bail to the accused No.2. On principle of parity also, the appellant is entitled for bail. On all these grounds, the learned Senior Counsel sought for allowing this appeal.

¶38

Ms.Asma Kauser, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1 would submit that the trial Court has properly

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:47254 CRL.A No. 2176 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

appreciated the materials on record and hence, that there are no grounds to allow this appeal.

¶43

I have examined the materials placed before this Court. On the basis of the complaint filed by the complainantinformant, the Hosakote Police Station have registered a case in Crime No.259/2025 for the commission of offences stated supra. The alleged incident took place on 16.02.2023 and after lapse of 3 years, the complainant has filed this complaint on 14.09.2025.

¶44

The Investigating Officer has not submitted the charge sheet within 60 days from the date of registration of the case as required under Sub Rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995. Even the Investigating Officer has not issued the arrest notice as required under Section 35 of BNSS 2023. If really the accused is required for investigation/interrogation, the Investigating Officer would have taken steps as required under Section 35 of BNSS 2023, but, he has not done so. Even till this day, though the offence is cognizable in nature, which is punishable with more than 7 years, the Investigating

¶45

6 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:47254 CRL.A No. 2176 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Officer has not taken any steps to arrest the appellant for the reasons best known to him. The trial Court has granted anticipatory bail to accused No.2.

¶49

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, there are no prima facie materials to attract the alleged penal provisions of SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989. The remaining offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

¶50

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

i) Appeal is allowed. ii) The order passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in Crl.Misc.No.1826/2025 dated 23.10.2025, is set aside in respect of the order passed against the appellant.

¶53

iii) Consequently, application filed under Section 482 of BNSS is allowed.

¶54

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:47254 CRL.A No. 2176 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

iv) The appellant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.259/2025 of Hosakote Police Station on executing a self bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for like sum.

¶57

v) The appellant shall not tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

¶58

vi) The appellant shall assist Investigating Officer for the investigation.

¶59

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶60

UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Abhishek J R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek J R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

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

Sri. Reddappa Reddy Vs State by

Sri Siddalingayya R Hiremath Vs Sri Shanmugam S

Ramesh B Y Vs M R Winchu