Karnataka High Court
Shivaraj Alias Shivu S/O Fakkirgouda ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 August, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
CRL.A No. 100505 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100505 OF 2025
(U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST ACT)
BETWEEN:
SHIVARAJ @ SHIVU S/O FAKKIRGOUDA KAREGOUDRA,
AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O. KANAKAPURA, TQ. AND DIST. HAVERI,
KARNATAKA.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANKIT R. DESAI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
HAVERI TOWN POLICE STATION, HAVERI-581 110,
REPRESENTED BY ITS POLICE INSPECTOR,
ALSO REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Digitally signed HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
by RAKESH S
RAKESH HARIHAR
Location: HIGH
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 002.
S COURT OF
HARIHAR KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH 2. SURESH S/O ASHOK BANGALORE,
AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. SWEEPER,
R/O. AMBEDKAR CIRCLE, HAVERI-581 110,
KARNATAKA.
3. RAJU S/O YALLAPPA DODDAMANI,
AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. SWEEPER,
R/O. AMBEDKAR CIRCLE, HAVERI-581 110,
KARNATAKA.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 AND R3-SERVED AND UNREPRESETNED)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
CRL.A No. 100505 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14 A(2) OF
SC AND ST ACT 1989, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
18.07.2025 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.456/2025 BY THE I ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT HAVERI AND
CONSEQUENTLY GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANT /
ACCUSED NO.5 IN CRIME NO.0104/2025 REGISTERED BY THE HAVERI
TOWN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 109, 132, 115(2), 118(1), 351(3)
AND 352 R/W SECTION 190 OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(R) AND
3(2)(VA) OF SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT
ACT 2015, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. Accused No.5 in Crime No.104 of 2025 registered
by Haveri Town Police Station, Haveri Sub Division, Haveri
District for the offences punishable under Section 189(2),
191(2), 191(3), 109, 132, 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 352
read with Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r) and
3(2)(va) of the SC / ST (POA) Amendment Bill, 2015, is
before this Court in this Appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
SC / ST (POA) Act, 1989, seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
HC-KAR
3. FIR in Crime No.104 of 2025 was registered by
Haveri Town Police Station, Haveri Sub Division, Haveri
District for the aforesaid offences against Akashata K.C. and
nine others, based on the first information dated
07.06.2025 received from Suresh Bangalore. The appellant
herein is arraigned as accused No.5 in the FIR.
Apprehending arrest in the case, the appellant had filed Crl.
Misc.No.456 of 2025 before the Jurisdictional Sessions
Court, which was rejected on 18th July 2025. Therefore, he
is before this Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submits that the alleged offences under SC / ST (POA) Act
do not get attracted against the appellant in the present
case, since the act of abusing the victim is not at a public
place to the public view. He submits that accused No.1 and
other accused, as against whom there is an allegation of
assaulting the injured victim are already granted regular
bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.100458 of 2025 and
connected appeal. In the earlier cases registered based on
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
HC-KAR
the complaint given by the victim in the present case, the
appellant is not an accused. Accordingly, he prays to allow
the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the prayer
made in the appeal. She submits that the alleged offences
clearly get attracted against the appellant. Similar
allegations are found in the first information as against
accused No.6 and accused No.6 who had approached this
Court in Criminal Appeal No.1005459 of 2025 seeking
anticipatory bail had withdrawn the said appeal, with liberty
to surrender before the jurisdictional Court and file
necessary application seeking regular bail. She submits that
the appellant is a person with criminal antecedents and
there are as many as three other criminal cases registered
against him. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the appeal.
6. In the first information submitted in the present
case by Suresh Bangalore, he has alleged that, in view of
the ill-will between the parties, because of the incident that
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
HC-KAR
had taken place earlier with regard to the removal of a
birthday banner, on 07.06.2025 at about 10:15 a.m., when
the first informant and other victims in the present case,
who are Poura Karmikas, were near Venkateshwar Bar and
Restaurant. the accused persons, who came there, armed
with deadly weapons, abused and assaulted Rajesh
Doddamani and others with a bat and broken beer bottles
and caused grievous injuries to them. The allegation of
assaulting Rajesh Doddamani with beer bottle is as against
accused No.2 and accused Nos.3, 4, 11 and 13 allegedly
assaulted Rajesh Doddamani with a bat. The other accused
persons allegedly assaulted the injured victim with their
hands and legs.
7. So far as accused Nos.5 and 6 are concerned,
there is a specific allegation that they had referred to the
caste name of the victims and had abused them. The
incident in question had taken place on 07.06.2025 in the
background of the fight between the two parties. In respect
of the earlier two incidents, two separate criminal cases are
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10976
HC-KAR
registered by the very same Police Station. The incident in
question had taken place near the Bar and Restaurant,
which is a public place and it cannot be said that there was
nobody present at the spot of crime, since the incident in
question has taken place at about 10:15 a.m. near the Bar
and Restaurant. During the course of investigation in the
present case, the Police have recorded the statement of the
witnesses, who have seen the incident in question and they
have spoken about the acts committed by accused Nos.5
and 6. Therefore, the alleged offences punishable under the
provisions of the SC / ST (POA) Act clearly get attracted
against accused Nos.5 and 6. In view of the bar under
Section 18 of the SC / ST (POA) Act, the prayer made by
the appellant, who is a person with criminal antecedents for
grant of anticipatory bail, therefore cannot be entertained.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
VNP / CT: BCK
