Karnataka High Court

Sri.Vinod G vs State Of Karnataka on 7 August, 2025

                                                     -1-
                                                                  NC: 2025:KHC:30686
                                                              CRL.A No. 1542 of 2025


                          HC-KAR




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                   DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

                                                   BEFORE
                                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

                           CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1542 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))

                          BETWEEN:

                          1.    SRI. VINOD G
                                S/O. LATE GOPALAKRISHNA,
                                AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
                                R/AT: KUDUKARENAHALLI
                                MAHADEVAPURA,
                                BENGALURU RURAL
                                BENGALURU DISTRICT-562 123.

                                INDICATED IN
                                CHARGESHEET AS:
                                SRI. VINOD G
                                S/O. LATE GOPALAKRISHNA
                                AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
Digitally signed by             R/AT: ADAKAMARANAHALLI
SREEDHARAN                      VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBALI,
BANGALORE SUSHMA
LAKSHMI                         BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
Location: High Court of         BENGALURU DISTRICT-562 123.
Karnataka
                                                                        ...APPELLANT
                          (BY SRI. AMAR ALEXANDER CORREA., ADVOCATE)

                          AND:

                          1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                                BY MADANAYAKANAHALLY POLICE STATION,
                                BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
                                BENGALURU-562 123.
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC:30686
                                    CRL.A No. 1542 of 2025


HC-KAR




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

2.   SRI. SUNIL
     S/O. CHANNAMALLAPPA
     R/O BINNAMANGALA,
     NELAMANGALA TOWN
     BENGALURU RURAL
     DISTRICT-562 123.
     NATIVE : KOHINURU
     VILLAGE AND HOBLI,
     BASAVAKALYANA TALUK,
     BIDAR DISTRICT,
     KARNATAKA-585 327.

                                           ...RESPONDENTS

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


       THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC
AND ST (POA) ACT, 1989 PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
30.01.2025 IN CRL.MISC NO.2683/2024 PASSED BY THE II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
RURAL    AT   BENGALURU   THEREBY   REJECTING   THE   BAIL
PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.


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


CORAM:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
                             -3-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC:30686
                                     CRL.A No. 1542 of 2025


HC-KAR




                      ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The appellant who is arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime

No.861/2024 of the respondent - Police is before this

Court seeking regular bail for the offences punishable

under Sections 140(1), 103, 118(1) r/w 3(5) of the

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS, 2023")

and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes

and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 (for short 'SC/ST (POA) Act') and seeking to set

aside the order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Crl.Misc

No.2683/2024 passed by the II Additional District and

Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural

District, Bengaluru.

Factual matrix of the case:

2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the respondent

No.2 is a resident of Binnamangala, Nelamangala Town.

Respondent No.2 is the youngest son amongst the

children of his parents. He was working as a driver in a

private company in Bengaluru. On 06.10.2024, Anil, the

brother of respondent No.2 had called him stating that

NC: 2025:KHC:30686

HC-KAR

Hindi speaking boys were quarreling with him on the

issue of a cooking gas cylinder and asked the respondent

No.2 to come. Immediately, at about 6.00 p.m., he

rushed to the said place and advised the said Hindi

speaking boys not to quarrel with his brother and left to

his room at Binnamangala. On the same day, at about

10.30 p.m., again his brother called him over the phone

and told him that he is in a parking yard. The petitioner,

chetan and two other drivers were beating him and asked

him to come there. At about 10.45 a.m., the respondent

No.2 was called by accused No.2 and others stating that

he had to come there or else his brother would be

finished. The respondent No.2 went to the spot around

1.00 a.m. There, the petitioner, chetan and two other

drivers were present. The petitioner and others have

started beating the respondent No.2 and Anil with a club

and abused respondent No.2 in a filthy language,

humiliated by naming his caste and went away from the

place. The brother of respondent No.2 sustained severe

injuries to his stomach and leg. Later, the respondent

No.2 took his brother to his room at Binnamangala. His

NC: 2025:KHC:30686

HC-KAR

brother did not take any treatment. Thereafter, on

07.10.2024, the brother of respondent No.2 was suffering

from stomach pain. Hence, he was shifted to 'Care Asia

Hospital', Nelamangala Town, there his brother

undergone operation. but, he could not survive. He died

on 09.10.2024. Therefore, a complaint came to be

registered against the accused and others. The

respondent police have registered a case in Crime

No.861/2024. After conducting the investigation,

submitted the charge sheet.

3. Heard Sri.Amar Alexander Correa, learned counsel for the

appellant and Sri.Vinay Mahadevaiah, learned High Court

Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State.

4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant

that the appellant was working as a driver. The overt-act

against him is that, he assaulted the deceased with hands

and also stated to have assaulted the complainant. The

deceased died due to stomach pain. The opinion of the

Doctor would indicate that the deceased died due to

septicemia as a result of peritonitis consequent upon

blunt trauma to abdomen. As the appellant had not

NC: 2025:KHC:30686

HC-KAR

committed any offence or assault on the stomach of the

deceased, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing

suitable conditions. Making such submissions, he prays

to allow the appeal.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader

for respondent No.1 - State vehemently opposed in

granting bail to the appellant and she further submitted

that the allegations are serious in nature. The incident of

assault had taken place for the reason that the deceased

belongs to a schedule caste. Since the appellant has

committed a heinous offence, his bail application cannot

be considered and it has to be rejected. Making such

submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader

for respondent No.1 prays to dismiss the appeal.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective

parties and also perused the averments of the charge

sheet, it appears from the record that respondent No.2,

being the brother of the deceased, had lodged a

complaint stating that his brother was working as a

cleaner in the company, namely, D.P World Express

Logistics Private Limited. The accused No.2 was working

NC: 2025:KHC:30686

HC-KAR

as a Supervisor in the said company, who belongs to

Lingayat community and he had appointed accused Nos.3

and 4 as drivers in the said logistics company. On

06.10.2024, the deceased Anil had asked C.W.19 and

C.W.20, a gas cylinder to get his food cooked. However,

it was rejected by C.W.19 and C.W.20. Thereafter, on

the same day, he called C.W.19 and C.W.20 and

assaulted them for not giving a gas cylinder. Accused

No.1 having learnt that deceased Anil had assaulted

C.W.19 and C.W.20, he went to the house of deceased

Anil and advised him that he should not assault C.W.19

and C.W.20. Being enraged by the said act, deceased

Anil assaulted accused No.2. Thereafter, all the accused

persons went to the house of Anil and stated to have

assaulted the deceased Anil. However, the overt-act

against the appellant is that, he assaulted the deceased

with his hands and other parts of his body.

7. Having considered the overt-act of the appellant, I am of

the considered opinion that the appellant has made out a

case to grant him bail.

8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

NC: 2025:KHC:30686

HC-KAR

ORDER

i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed.

ii) The order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Crl.Misc

No.2683/2024 passed by the II Additional District

and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru

Rural District, Bengaluru, is set aside.

iii) The appellant / accused No.1 is ordered to be

enlarged on bail in Crime No.861/2024 of

respondent-police, on executing a personal bond for

a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with

one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the

Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: