Dismissed¶47

Sri Doddamanjunatha v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2026CRL.A/1522/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail — appeal under S.14(A)(2) SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015 — accused No.2 in Spl.S.C.No.46/2021 (Crime No.43/2021, Gudibande P.S.) for S.302 IPC murder with SC/ST atrocities charges — successive bail pleas earlier rejected in Crl.A.No.3/2022 (22.04.2022), Crl.A.No.1101/2023 (17.11.2023) and Crl.A.No.1042/2024 (21.08.2024) — in custody since 23.05.2021 — trial at arguments stage, all witnesses examined — no merits discussed — appeal dismissed, trial Court directed to expedite trial — High Court of Karnataka, Mohammad Nawaz J., 03.07.2026 — NC: 2026:KHC:33475.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant; bail prayer rejected. The appeal was dismissed with a further direction to the trial Court to expedite the trial. ¶47

Sri Doddamanjunatha Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:33475 CRL.A No. 1522 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1522 OF 2025

¶9

(U/S 14(A) (2))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI DODDAMANJUNATHA, S/O GERAGI VENKATAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/A ARURU VILLAGE,

¶12

CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK 562101

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI. SANDEEP S PATIL., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH GUDIBANDE POLICE STATION, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

SMT. MANJULAMMA, W/O A.C. RAMANJINEYA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/A AVULANAGENAHALLI VILLAGE, CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562101.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. S. R. SREEPRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶20

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:33475 CRL.A No. 1522 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SETT ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.07.2025 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE 1^ST ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA IN SPL.S.C.NO.46/2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.43/2021 REGISTERED AS SPL.SC.NO.46/2021 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 GUDIBANDE P.S. FOR O/U/S. 109, 114, 120(B), 143, 147, 147, 148, 302, 307, 324, 447 R/W SEC.149 OF THE IPC, 1860 AND SEC.3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) OF THE SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by accused No.2 in S.C.No.46/2021 on the file of the Court of

¶27

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballaupra.

¶28

Appellant / accused No.2 along with 10 other

¶29

accused are facing trial for the offences punishable under 109, 114, 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 324, 447 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Caste and

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:33475 CRL.A No. 1522 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶34

This Court, on three occasions, has considered the prayer of the appellant for bail, and after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer was rejected. Crl.A.No.3/2022 and connected matters were dismissed on 22.04.2022, Crl.A.No.1101/2023 was dismissed on 17.11.2023 and Crl.A.No.1042/2024 was dismissed on 21.08.2024.

¶35

The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that in this case the Appellant was arrested on 23.05.2021 and he is languishing in judicial custody since then. The trial Court has made an erroneous observation while rejecting his prayer for bail, that PW.1, the complainant and PW.3 and PW.4, eyewitnesses, have all spoken about the participation of the appellant in the incident and he has actively participated in the commission of the murder. He contended that the depositions of PW.1, PW.3 and PW.4, alleged eyewitnesses, nowhere

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:33475 CRL.A No. 1522 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

depicts that the appellant was either present at the scene of offence or was an assailant.

¶40

Learned High Court Government Pleader and

¶41

the learned counsel appearing for the complainant would contend that all the contentions were taken by the appellant in the previous appeals and already considered. It is further contended that the trial is at the fag end, where all the witnesses are examined and now the case is posted for final arguments.

¶42

This Court at this stage can neither express any view on the merits of the case nor appreciate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Any observations made may prejudice both the parties.

¶43

Considering that the trial is at the arguments stage and also taking into consideration that already this Court has directed the trial Court to dispose of the case within 4 months vide order dated 17.11.2023 in

¶44

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:33475 CRL.A No. 1522 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Crl.A.No.1101/2023, the appeal is dismissed , with further

¶48

direction to the trial Court to expedite the trial.

¶49

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶50