Charan J S Vs State by Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Charan J S Vs State by Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed; the Special Court's order dated 22.11.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.596/2024 set aside; appellant/accused No.2 (in charge sheet) ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.10/2023 of Mallandur Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, subject to conditions: (a) appear before the jurisdictional court within one week and execute a personal bond of Rs.1,000,000/- (printed as 'Rupees One Lakh only') with two sureties for the likesum; (b) furnish proof of residential address/contact number and inform Court/I.O. of changes; (c) cooperate with further investigation, if any; (d) not tamper with prosecution evidence/witnesses directly or indirectly; (e) be regular in attending court proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, whose anticipatory bail had been repeatedly rejected (Crl.A.Nos.737/2023, 1379/2023, 635/2024), is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and to have the Special Court's rejection order set aside. +2 more

Court's answer

Considering the above facts and circumstances, the relief sought by the appellant in this appeal (enlargement on bail) can be granted, however by imposing conditions.

Ratio / Principle

Since the witnesses CW.8 to CW.10, who were present at the spot, stated that the accused did not abuse the complainant or others and that no incident of abuse or assault took place, it cannot be said that there is a prima facie case against the appellant at this stage.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal No. 109 of 2025 (NC: 2026:KHC:21098), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 10.04.2026 by Mohammad Nawaz, J., filed under S.14A(2) SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 - Anticipatory bail granted. Appellant Charan J. S. (accused No.3 in FIR; accused No.2 in charge sheet) sought enlargement on bail in Crime No.10/2023 of Mallandur Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, arising from an incident of 10.02.2023 in which officials preparing a road sketch at Joldhal village were allegedly obstructed and the complainant-party assaulted with clubs and abused referring to caste; a counter-case (Crime No.9/2023) had been registered the same day against the complainant side. Earlier anticipatory-bail appeals Crl.A.No.737/2023 (dismissed as withdrawn 21.04.2023), Crl.A.No.1379/2023 (dismissed as not pressed 22.09.2023) and Crl.A.No.635/2024 (disposed 01.10.2024 permitting a fresh petition after charge sheet) preceded this appeal. Charge sheet was filed only against accused Nos.1 and 3 (names of four dropped) under S.504, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC and S.3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) SC&ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. Witnesses CWs.8-CW.10 (Revenue Inspector, Taluk Surveyor, Village Panchayath Officer), though present at the spot, stated that no abuse or assault took place in their presence; the Court accordingly found no prima facie case against the appellant at this stage, allowed the appeal, set aside the Special Court's rejection order dated 22.11.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.596/2024, and ordered release on bail in the event of arrest subject to conditions including a personal bond of Rs.1,000,000/- (printed as 'Rupees One Lakh only') with two sureties.

NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 109 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

CHARAN J. S. S/O J.V. SURESH, AGE 31 YEARS, R/OF JOLDAL VILLAGE AND POST, VASTARE HOBLI, CHIKKAMAGALURU - PIN CODE-577133.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. UTSAV GOWDA P S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

STATE BY KARNATAKA MALLANDURU POLICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560001.

SMT. SUMITHRA W/O LATE SOMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

SMT. NETHRA W/O LATE PUTTASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

SMT. RADHA W/O. KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

5. SMT. SUSHEELA

W/O. PUTTASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

ALL ARE COOLIES, KALENHALLI JOLADAL VILLAGE, VASTHARE HOBLI, CHIKMAGALURU, KARNATAKA PIN CODE - 577133.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI.K., HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED)

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.01.2024 IN CRL.MISC.NO.596/2024 IN CR.NO.10/2023 REGISTERED BY MALLANDURU POLICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU STATION ON THE FILE OF SPL.C.NO.95/2023, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 3(1)(r)(s)(2) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015, U/S 504,323,324,506 AND 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT CHIKMAGALUR.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for appellant, learned High

Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record. Respondent No.2 is served but unrepresented.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

The order dated 22.11.2024 passed by the

Court of I Additional Sessions and Special Judge, at Chikkamagaluru in Crl.Misc.No.596/2024, rejecting the prayer of the appellant to enlarge him on bail, is assailed in this appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.

It is the case of prosecution that on 10.02.2023 at 11.30 a.m., Revenue Inspector, Village Accountant and Taluk Surveyor and other officials visited Joldhal village, Vastare Hobli, Chikkamagaluru, to prepare a sketch to form a connecting road to Kalenahalli from the main road. When the complainant and others were cooperating with the said officials to prepare the sketch, at about 03:00 p.m., all the accused forming an unlawful assembly, came to the spot and assaulted the complainant and others with clubs and also abused them in filthy language referring to their caste etc.

FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 6

for offences punishable under Section 504, 323, 324, 506

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

read with 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)

of SC/ST (POA), Amendment Bill 2015.

Accused Nos.1 to 6 preferred

Crl.A.No.737/2023 before this Court, against the rejection of their anticipatory bail application by the Special Court. The said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on 21.04.2023. Once again, accused Nos.3 to 6 preferred Crl.A.No.1379/2023 before this Court against the order rejecting their anticipatory bail application. The said appeal was also dismissed as not pressed on 22.09.2023. The appellant herein, arraigned as accused No.3 in the FIR, approached this Court in Crl.A.No.635/2024 challenging the order dated 09.03.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.131/2023 by the Special Court, rejecting his prayer seeking anticipatory bail. The said appeal was disposed of on 01.10.2024, permitting him to file a fresh petition, in view of filing of charge sheet.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

The Special Court has now once again rejected

the prayer seeking anticipatory bail filed by the appellant vide impugned order. Hence, this appeal.

The Special Court has rejected the prayer seeking anticipatory bail, observing that the successive bail application can be entertained if there is any change in the fact situation or in law which requires the earlier view being interfered with or where the earlier finding has become obsolete. Further, the accused had approached the Court seeking anticipatory bail earlier and it was rejected and even this court also not granted anticipatory bail and mere filing of charge sheet is not a change in circumstance.

The learned High Court Government Pleader

contended that already the prayer seeking anticipatory bail has been rejected by the Special Court as well as by this Court and there is no changed circumstances to once again consider the prayer. He contended that the trial

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

Court has issued NBW against the appellant and in view of filing of charge sheet, there is a prima-facie case.

The learned counsel for the appellant has drawn

the attention of the court to the statements of CWs.8 to 10, namely the Revenue Inspector, Taluk Surveyor and Village Panchayath Officer, to contend that they have stated that in their presence, the accused have not abused the complainant or others in filthy language referring to their caste. He contended that in view of the civil dispute, the appellant is falsely implicated in this case. Further, the complaint is lodged after a case was registered against the complainant and others in Crime No.9/2023 of Mallandur Police Station, Chikkamagaluru.

In this case, FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 6 on a complaint lodged by one Sumithra, whose statement was recorded from the hospital. The case was registered in Crime No.10/2023 of Mallandur police station, on 10.02.2023 at about 10.00 p.m. Prior to registration of the said case, on the very same day at

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

about 05:30 p.m. there was a case registered in Crime No.9/2023 on a complaint lodged by one Dharshan, arraigned as accused No.4 in this case, against the first informant Sumithra and nine 9 others, for the offence punishable under Section 427, 506, 504, 149, 447, 323, 324 of IPC. Be that as it may, though 6 accused are named in the FIR, while filing charge sheet, names of 4 accused are dropped. Charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 and 3 named in the FIR, for the offences punishable under Section 504, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of the SC&ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

Insofar as the allegations under the Atrocities Act is concerned, the witnesses namely CW.8 to CW.10 have stated that they were present at the spot and the accused have not abused the complainant or others and that no such incident of abuse or assault took place. In view of the same, it cannot be said that there is a prima-facie case against the appellant at this stage.

8 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

Considering the above facts and circumstances,

the relief sought by the appellant in this appeal can be granted, however by imposing conditions. Accordingly, the following:-

ORDER

i) The appeal is allowed .

ii) The Order dated 22.11.2024 passed by the

Court of I Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Chikkamagaluru, in Crl.Misc.No.596/2024 is set aside.

iii) The appellant/accused No.2 (in charge sheet) is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest. In Crime No.10/2023 of Mallandur Police Station, Chikkamagaluru, subject to following conditions:

a) He shall appear before the Jurisdictional Court within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,000,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum.

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:21098 CRL.A No. 109 of 2025

HC-KAR

b) He shall furnish proof of his residential address/contact number and shall inform the Court/I.O. in case of any change in the address/contact number.

c) He shall co-operate with the further investigation of the case, if any.

d) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence/witnesses either directly or indirectly.

e) He shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings.

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

LDC

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Rejection of the appellant's prayer to be enlarged on bail (anticipatory bail) in Crl.Misc.No.596/2024; the Special Court reasoned that a successive bail application can be entertained only on a change in the fact situation or in law, and that mere filing of charge sheet is not a change in circumstance.¶35
Court of I Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Chikkamagaluru · 22.11.2024
Prior proceeding
Prosecution case: on 10.02.2023 at 11.30 a.m., Revenue Inspector, Village Accountant, Taluk Surveyor and other officials visited Joldhal village, Vastare Hobli, Chikkamagaluru to prepare a sketch for a connecting road to Kalenahalli; at about 3:00 p.m. the accused allegedly formed an unlawful assembly, assaulted the complainant and others with clubs and abused them in filthy language referring to their caste.¶36
Prior proceeding
FIR (Crime No.10/2023, Mallandur police station) registered on 10.02.2023 at about 10.00 p.m. against accused Nos.1 to 6 on a complaint lodged by one Sumithra, whose statement was recorded from the hospital.¶59
Prior proceeding
Counter-case: prior to the FIR, on the very same day at about 05:30 p.m., Crime No.9/2023 was registered on a complaint by Dharshan (accused No.4 in this case) against first informant Sumithra and nine others, for offences under S.427, 506, 504, 149, 447, 323, 324 IPC.¶62
Prior proceeding
Accused Nos.1 to 6 (including the appellant) filed Crl.A.No.737/2023 before this Court against rejection of their anticipatory bail application by the Special Court; dismissed as withdrawn on 21.04.2023.¶45
Prior proceeding
Accused Nos.3 to 6 filed Crl.A.No.1379/2023 before this Court against rejection of their anticipatory bail application; dismissed as not pressed on 22.09.2023.¶45
Prior proceeding
The appellant, arraigned as accused No.3 in the FIR, filed Crl.A.No.635/2024 challenging the Special Court's order dated 09.03.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.131/2023 rejecting his anticipatory bail prayer.¶45
Prior proceeding
Crl.A.No.635/2024 was disposed of on 01.10.2024, permitting the appellant to file a fresh petition in view of the filing of the charge sheet.¶45
Prior proceeding
Charge sheet filed only against accused Nos.1 and 3 named in the FIR (names of 4 accused dropped), for offences under S.504, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC and S.3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of the SC&ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.¶62