Sameer Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 508 OF 2026

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SAMEER, S/O MOHAMMED ALI, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.5/169, AHAMAD NAGARA MOHALLA, GALIPURA, CHAMARAJANAGARA, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 117. (NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY)

¶9

&APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. K. A. CHANDRASHEKARA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE POLICE OF CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN POLICE STATION, CHAMARAJANAGARA - 571 117.

¶14

REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

ABHI MALLIK, S/O MALLIKARJUNASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

NO.1, KARINANJAPURA MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN, CHAMARAJANAGARA - 571 117.

¶20

&RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI.VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; R2 IS SERVED)

¶22

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/03/2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CHAMARAJANAGAR IN CRL. MISC. NO. 63/2026 AND GRANT HIM BAIL IN CRIME NO.13/2026 OF CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 309(4) AND 190 OF BNS 2023 AND 3(1)(r)(s) OF SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (POA) 1989.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal is against the Order dated 05.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc No.63 of 2026 on the file of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar, by which the application filed by the appellant herein under Section 14(A)(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015 seeking grant of bail in Crime No.13/2026 registered before the respondent - police for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 309(4) and 190 of BNS 2023 and 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 has been rejected.

¶29

2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent No.2-defacto complainant had filed a complaint dated 24.01.2026 alleging that on 24.01.2026 at about 4.45 p.m. while he was moving on his twowheeler along with his friend one Sayeeda Afsar, from Mubarak Mohalla towards the Court Road to drop her at her place, about 12 to 15 boys waylaid and threatened him questioning as to how he could take his friend who

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

belongs to their community; that the said persons had asked his caste and thereafter abused in the name of his caste and also assaulted him by hands. During the conversation, one of the members of the said group had instructed another to call one Sameer over phone. Thereafter, another person snatched a gold chain of 25 grams from his neck. Hence, the complaint; based on which, respondent - police registered a case for the offences punishable as noted above.

¶34

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the very averments made in the complaint indicate that the appellant herein was not present at the alleged spot as he overheard one of the members of the group instructing the other to call Sameer, which indicates that the appellant was nowhere to be seen at the spot. Further he submits even otherwise on merits, there is no averment in the complaint of the respondent No.2 - defacto complainant being abused with reference to specific name of his caste. Therefore on both the counts, the appellant is

¶35

5 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

entitled for bail. He submits that charge sheet has already been filed. Therefore, the appellant is not required for any interrogation and seeks for allowing the appeal.

¶39

4. Learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand opposing the appeal submits that material evidence indicate rivalry and if the appellant is let on bail, he would unduly influence the witnesses during the trial. Hence, seeks for rejection of the bail.

¶40

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and

¶41

learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the records.

¶42

6. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for

¶43

the appellant, the respondent No.2-defacto complainanthimself has stated that one of the members of the group

¶44

who had allegedly assaulted him had instructed the other

¶45

member of the same group to call one Sameer over phone. The said Sameer is stated to be the appellant

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

herein. Except this, there is nothing in the complaint to indicate either the presence of appellant at the time of alleged incident at the spot or his involvement in the matter.

¶49

7. Further as pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant though allegation is made that the said group of persons had abused him in the name of his caste, nothing is mentioned as to which particular caste the respondent No.2-defacto complainant belonged. In the absence of which, no prima facie case falling under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015 is made out.

¶50

8. Further, since the charge sheet has already

¶51

been filed, in the view of above facts and circumstances,

¶52

this Court deems it appropriate to allow the appeal.

¶53

9. Accordingly, the following:

¶54

O R D E R

¶55

The appeal is allowed .

¶56

7 -

¶57

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

The impugned order dated 05.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc.No.63 of 2026 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar, is set aside.

¶60

The accused No.1-appellant is enlarged on bail for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 309(4) and 190 of BNS 2023 and 3(1)(r)(s) o f Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 subject to the following conditions;

¶61

a) Accused No.1/appellant shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one local surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶62

b) Accused No.1/appellant shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶63

c) Accused No.1/appellant shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶64

d) Accused No.1/appellant shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶65

8 -

¶66

NC: 2026:KHC:23196 CRL.A No. 508 of 2026

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

e) Accused No.1/appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶69

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶70

SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Sameer v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer 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

Indudhar Mallikarjun Kataraki Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ravikumar @ Ravi L S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri K Krishnappa, Since Deceased Rep. by His Lr's. Vs Smt Puttamma Since Deceased Rep by Her Lrs.

Ranganatha @ Ravi Vs State of Karnataka by

Prabha @ Prabhavathi Vs State of Karnataka

Abdul Kaleem Vs the State of Karnataka