Karnataka High Court
Mr. Dinesh R vs State By on 16 July, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
CRL.A No. 1229 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1229 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
MR. DINESH R
S/O MR. RAJANNA B C,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
RESIDING AT #150,
BASAVANAHALLI,
NELAMANGALA,
BENGALURU RURAL,
KARNATAKA - 562 123
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIJU ABRAHAM VERGHIS, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY
NELAMANGALA RURAL PS
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Digitally
signed by HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
SWAPNA V PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU,
Location: HIGH COURT BUILDING,
High Court of PIN CODE 560 001
Karnataka
2. PRAMOD .M
S/O MALLIKAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
BANNURU VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, SHIKARIPURA
TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA,
KARNATAKA - 577 427.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1
SRI. NAGENDRA .B., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
CRL.A No. 1229 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO THE APPELLANT MAY BE RELEASED FROM J.C AND
ENLARGED ON REGULAR BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH
CR.NO.167/2025 OF THE NELAMANGALA RURAL P.S. BENGALURU
RURAL U/S 108, 3(5) OF THE BNS ACT 2023 AND SEC.3(2)(V) OF
THE SC/ST (POA) ACT (ANNEXURE-A) (STATE BY NELAMANGALA P.S.
VS DINES R AND ORS) PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDGE OF
THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL
CITY CIVIL COURT, BENGALURU (TRIAL COURT).
THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appellant -accused No.1 is before this Court seeking
grant of bail under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST (POA) Act' for short) in
Crime No.167/2025 of Nelamangala Rural Police Station,
pending before the learned II Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru Rural, City Civil Court, Bengaluru, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section
3(2)(v) of the Act, on the basis of the first information lodged
by informant - Pramod M.
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
HC-KAR
2. Heard Sri. Shiju Abraham Verghis, learned Counsel
for the appellant and Smt.Rashmi Jadhav, learned Additional
SPP for respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on
record.
3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the
learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise
for my consideration is:
"Whether the appellant is entitled for grant
of bail under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the
following:
REASONS
4. Crime No.167/2025 of Nelamangala Rural police
station came to be registered against the appellant herein for
the offence punishable under Sections under Sections 108, 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and
Section 3(2)(v) of the Act.
5. It is the contention of the prosecution that the
deceased Puneeth is the brother of CW1 and he belongs to a
Schedule Tribe. He was residing with one Ramya and CW19, in
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
HC-KAR
the house of CW17. The said Ramya came in contact with the
accused during 2022 and they had an affair. Ramya insisted the
accused to marry her. But since the accused was already
married and was having children, he was not ready to marry
her. He is said to have abused Ramya that he is not going to
marry her and instigated her to go and die. As a result of
which, said Ramya committed suicide in a shed by hanging on
24.04.2025. On coming to know about the death of Ramya,
deceased Puneet also committed suicide in the house of CW17
after sending a Whatsapp message and voice messages to
CW21, informing about the facts and role played by the
accused in abetting the commission of suicide. After
investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed for the above
said offences.
6. Admittedly, the appellant was apprehended on
25.04.2025, i.e., on the next day of incident. Now the
investigation is completed and it is not the contention of the
prosecution that the appellant is required for further
investigation or for any other reason, except to ensure his
presence before the trial. It is also not the contention of the
prosecution that the appellants having any criminal
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
HC-KAR
antecedents. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion
that the appellant may be granted bail subject to conditions,
which will take care of the interest of the prosecution, as well
as interest of the complainant and the witnesses.
7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the
affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed.
The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime
No.167/2025 of Nelamangala Rural Police Station, on obtaining
the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only)
with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The appellant shall not commit similar
offences.
b). The appellant shall not threaten or tamper
with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The appellant shall appear before the Court
as and when required.
NC: 2025:KHC:26423
HC-KAR
If in case, the appellant violates any of the conditions as
stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the
Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the appellant, the Trial
Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify
the correctness of the address and authenticity of the
documents furnished by the appellant and the sureties and a
report may be called for in that regard, which is to be
submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial
Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for
the purpose of releasing the appellant on bail.
Sd/-
(M G UMA)
JUDGE
BH
CT:VS
