Halappa K N Vs the State of Karnataka

HALAPPA K N S/O NAGAPPA K B, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHIVAMOGGA RURAL POLICE STATION, R/O 53, SAMRUDDI, B-BLOCK, GOLDEN CITY LAYOUT, GADIKOPPA, NEAR SHARAVATHI DENTAL COLLEGE, GOPALA GOWDA EXTENSION, SHIVAMOGGA-577 202.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. VEERANNA G TIGADI.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RURAL POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA, TALUKA AND DISTRICT SHIVAMOGGA,

¶15

REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU. 560 001.

¶16

SMT. NANDINI C. D/O CHANDRASHEKAR, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O NANDINI NILAYA, 8/2 CROSS, SHANTHI NAGAR, TALUKA AND DISTRICT SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1 SMT. PARINEETA S CHANAL, ADV. FOR R2)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.12.2025 DISMISSING HIS PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 IN CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO: 1200/2025, PASSED BY 2ND ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGGA AND BY GRANTING HIM ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN SHIVAMOGGA RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO:357/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii),351(2),352 OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r),3(1)(s),3(2)(va),3(1)(w) (i), 3(2)(vii) OF SCHEDULE CASTES AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 DIRECTING THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER/RESPONDENT NO:1 POLICE TO RELEASE HIM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA.

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 08.12.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1200/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga (for short 'the trial Court').

¶26

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

Brief facts leading to this appeal are that, on the basis of the complaint filed by victim, Shivamogga Rural Police have registered the case in Crime No.357/2025 against the appellant/accused for the commission of offence under Sections 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(vii), 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶30

The appellant had filed application under Section 482

¶31

of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail. Same came to be rejected by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by rejection of application, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant

¶33

would submit that the impugned order is illegal, perverse and liable to be set aside. The accused has not committed

¶34

any offence as alleged against him. The offence alleged to have been committed by the appellant are not for the reasons that respondent No.2 belongs to Scheduled

¶35

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Caste/Scheduled Tribe. Infact, she does not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The offence alleged against the accused are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The trial Court has not taken into consideration the relevant circumstances and factors while passing the impugned order and dismissing the petition. The accused is aged 51 years working as Assistant Sub-inspector of Police, a public servant and he is the only earning member of his family. If he is arrested and committed to custody, there is every likelihood of losing employment. The complainant had filed case against one Krishnamurthy K.H, was registered in SC.No.190/2014, in which accused was acquitted. Neither the State nor the victim has preferred any appeal against the judgment passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga in SC.No.190/2014. The appellant is ready to

¶38

abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court. On all these grounds, it is sought to allow this appeal.

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Learned counsel Smt. Parineeta S, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 and Sri B.Lakshman, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State, would submit that the trial court has properly appreciated the materials on record and sought for dismissal of this appeal.

¶43

I have examined the materials placed before this court. On the basis of the complaint filed by victim, Shivamogga Rural Police have registered the case against the accused for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(vii), 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶44

The gist of the FIR is as under:

¶45

"��ಾಂಕ:26-11-2025 ರಂದು �ಾ�� 08-00 ಗಂ�ೆಯ ಸಮಯದ�� ಾ�ದು�ಾರರು �ಾ�ೆ�ೆ �ಾಜ�ಾ� �ೕ ದ �!ತ ದೂ$ನ &ಾ�ಾಂಶ(ೇ�ೆಂದ�ೆ , ��ಾ�ದು�ಾರರು �ಾ�ಗುಡದ (ಾ+�ಾ�ದು, �ಾ�ಗುಡದ ಏ$�ಾದ�� 2025�ೇ &ಾ�ನ ಜನವ$ ಸಮಯದ�� ಆದ ಗ0ಾ�ೆ ಸಂದಭ�ದ�� 2ವ3ಗ4 �ಾ�5ಾಂತರ 6�ೕ7 �ಾ�ೆಯ ಎ ಎ7 ಐ

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

ರವ�ಾದ �ಾಲಪ< =ೆ .ಎ> ವರು ಪ$ಚಯ(ಾ� 6ೕ> ನಂಬA ಪBೆದು=ೊಂಡು ��ಾ�ದು�ಾರರ ಯಜ5ಾನರು �ೊರ�ೆ ಡೂCD 5ಾಡುವ ಸಮಯ �Eದು=ೊಂಡು Fೕ> ಕ�ೆ 5ಾಡಲು ಮುಂ�ಾ�ದು, ಆಗ ��ಾ�� 02 &ಾ$ Gಾ�5ಾHಕIೆJಂದ Fೕ> +Kೕಕ$+ರುIಾL�ೆ , ನಂತರ ಪ�� ನ ಕ�ೆ 5ಾಡಲು Gಾ�ರಂM+ದು, ��ಾ�ದು�ಾರರು ಕ�ೆ +Kೕ=ಾರ 5ಾಡ�ದ,�ೆ ಪಕNದ ಮ�ೆಯ ಗ0ಾ�ೆಯ =ೇ+ನ�� &ೇ$ಸುIೆL(ೆಂದು Oೆದ$=ೆ �ಾP &ೆQೕಹ ಬಳಸಲು ಪ�Tೋದ�ೆ 5ಾ Uಂ&ೆ 5ಾ ದು, ��ಾ�� ಅವರ Oೆದ$=ೆ�ೆ �ೆದ$ Fೕ> ಕ�ೆ +Kೕಕ$ಸಲು +ದWXಾ�ಾಗ ಅದನುQ ದುರುಪYೕಗ 5ಾ =ೊಂಡು &ೆQೕಹ ಬಳ+ 0ೈಂ�ಕ(ಾ� ಬಳ+=ೊಂಡು [ತ� Uಂ&ೆ =ೊಡಲು ಮತುL �ೈUಕ(ಾ� Uಂ&ೆ =ೊಟು], ಎ7.D ^ಾ�ಯವXೆ ಎಂದು �ಂದ�ೆ 5ಾಡಲು Gಾ�ರಂM+ದು, ಇ�Lೕ[ನ �ನಗಳ�� ಾವ ಸಮಯದ0ಾ�ದರು �ಾ�� ಹಗಲು ಮಧC�ಾ�� Oೆಳ�ನ ^ಾವ Fೕ> ಕ�ೆ +Kೕಕ$ಸ�ೆ ಇದ,�ೆ ��ಾ�� ಮ�ೆ ಹ�Lರ ಬಂದು =ೆಟ]�ಾ� �ಂ�+ 5 �ಂಗEಂದ ಅ�ಕೂ�$�ಾ� �ೈUಕ ಮತುL 5ಾನ+ಕ(ಾ� Uಂ&ೆ �ೕಡುIಾL ಬಂ�ರುIಾL�ೆ , ಆದ$ಂದ 0ೈಂ�ಕ(ಾ� �ೌಜ�ನC (ೆಸ� ^ಾ� �ಂದ�ೆ 5ಾ ದ �ಾಲಪ< =ೆ ,ಎ> ರವರ bೕ0ೆ =ಾನೂನು $IಾC ಕ�ಮ =ೈ�ೊಳcಲು �ೕ ದ �!Iಾ ದೂ$ನ bೕ�ೆ�ೆ ಸ��+ದ ಪ� ವ ವರ� &ಾ�ಾಂಶ."

¶50

In column No.3 of the FIR, the date of the

¶51

commission of offence is stated commencing from 01.01.2025 to 26.11.2025. The complaint came to be filed on 26.11.2025 and FIR was submitted to the court on 27.11.2025 at 10.40 am. After lapse of more than ten months from the date of commission of offence, the complainant has lodged the complaint. In column No.3(c)

¶52

7 -

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

of FIR, the Investigating Officer has not shown any

¶56

reasons for delay in filing the complaint.

¶57

On plain reading of this complaint, at this stage, it is crystal clear that the appellant has not abused the complainant in presence of public. Therefore, at this stage, there are no sufficient prima facie materials to constitute the penal provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The copy of the judgment passed in SC.No.190/2014 filed by State by Mahila Police Station, Shivamogga reveals that the present complainant is shown as PW1. She had filed a complaint against one Krishnamurthy K H @ Viveka. On the basis of this complaint, case was registered and thereafter charge sheet was filed against the accused for the commission of offence under Sections 376(1) and 417 of IPC.

¶58

On 14.08.2015, the III Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga has acquitted the accused for the offence under Sections 376 and 417 Indian Penal Code. The State

¶59

8 -

¶60

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

or victim has not preferred any appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga. Taking into consideration the inordinate delay in filing the complaint and previous antecedents of the appellant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I proceed to pass the following:

¶63

O R D E R

¶64

(i) Appeal is allowed;

¶65

(ii) The order dated 08.12.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1200/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, is set aside. Consequently, application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, is allowed, subject to following conditions:

¶66

a. Appellant/accused shall be released on bail on executing a self-bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer in the event of his arrest in Crime No.357/2025 of Shivamogga Rural Police;

¶67

9 -

¶68

NC: 2026:KHC:5387 CRL.A No. 2526 of 2025

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

b. Appellant/accused shall not tamper or threaten the prosecution witness in any manner;

¶71

c. Appellant/accused shall assist the Investigating Officer for investigation;

¶72

d. Appellant/accused shall not indulge in similar offence;

¶73

e. If the appellant/accused violates any of the bail conditions, the Victim and/or State is at liberty to take necessary steps in accordance with law.

¶74

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶75

DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Halappa K N v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Halappa K N v. the 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

Smt Umme Salma Khanum Vs Sri Khalid Mohamed Khan

Sri.Madappa Gopal Vs Smt.Anitha Srinivas

Mr. G. Ramachandra Reddy Vs Mr. Krishna Reddy

Dr R v Keshava Murthy Vs Smt. Muthulakshmi

Sri. T a Krishna Vs Smt. Pallavi

Sri. Kariyappa Vs Sri. S Rangaswamy