Sri.Uday vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 3159 Kant

                             1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

                         BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

          CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 964/2021

BETWEEN

Sri. Uday
S/o Ramesha
Aged about 24 years
Delivery Boy of ATBD Company
R/at: No. 84, Ward No. 12,
Jambhava Nagara,
Anekal Taluk,
Bengaluru District - 562 106.
                                         ...Appellant
(By Sri.Leeladhar H P, Advocate)

AND

  1.    State of Karnataka
        By Attibele Police Station,
        Anekal Taluk,
        Bengaluru District,
        Rep:SPP,
        High Court Buildings,
        Bengaluru - 560 001.

  2.    Srinath,
        S/o Saibanna,
        Aged about 29 years,
        Supervisor,
        R/at Murthi Building,
        Tulasi Concrete,
                               2


        Anjinapura Village,
        Banshankari,
        Bengaluru South Taluk,
        Bengaluru - 560 062.

        Original Residence:
        Banami Village,
        Kalagi Taluk,
        Kalburgi District.
        Mob.No. 9663074745

                                          ...Respondents
(By Sri.R. D. Renukaradhya, HCGP for R1; R2 served)

      This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14-A (2)
of SC/ST (POA) Act praying to set aside the order dated
26.03.2021 passed by the II Additional District and
Sessions    Judge,    Bengaluru      Rural    District,  in
Spl.C.C.No.12/2021 rejecting the bail petition and etc.,

      This Criminal Appeal coming on for admission this
day, the court delivered the following:


                       JUDGMENT

This is an appeal under section 14A of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act').

Appellant is accused No.3 in Special Case No. 12/2021

pending on the file of II Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District. The

Sessions Court dismissed the bail application of the

appellant and hence this appeal aggrieved by the said

order.

2. The appellant and other accused have been

facing trial in connection with offences punishable

under sections 364, 302, 201 of IPC and section

3(2)(5) of the Act read with section 34 of IPC. The

case pertains to homicidal death of one Dattatreya.

There are no eye witnesses to the incident and the

entire case rests on circumstantial evidence. Already

this court has granted bail to accused Nos. 1 and 2 in

Crl.A.575/2021. Therefore parity can be extended to

the appellant. In view of this, appeal deserves to be

allowed. Hence, the following : -

ORDER

(i) Appeal is allowed.

(ii) The order passed by the II Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru

Rural District, Bengaluru, dated

26.3.2021 on the application under

section 439 Cr.P.C is set aside, the said

application is allowed.

(iii) It is hereby ordered that the appellant

shall be released on bail by obtaining

from him a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- and

two sureties for the likesum to the

satisfaction of the trial court. The

appellant is also subjected to the

conditions that,

(a) He shall not tamper with the evidence

and threaten the witnesses.

(b) He shall regularly appear before the

trial court till conclusion of the trial.

(c) He shall produce his address proof to

the trial court and he shall undertake

that in case he changes his residence,

he shall update his address by filing

his address.

(d) He shall not get involved in any

criminal offence.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ckl