Karnataka High Court
H P Girisha @ Giri @ Encounter Giri vs State Of Karnataka on 9 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
CRL.A No. 821 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 821 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
H P GIRISHA @ GIRI @ ENCOUNTER GIRI
S/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NO. 17, 1ST FLOOR, MIG,
KHB COLONY, HOOTAGALLI,
MYSURU - 570 018
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. TONY SEBASTIAN, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY METAGALLI POLICE STATION
MYSURU CITY, R/BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
Digitally signed BANGALORE - 560 001.
by SWAPNA V
Location: High 2. SMT. RADHA .H.
Court of W/O LATE HANUMANTHU .K. @ BANGARI,
Karnataka
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT NO.276, RAMAMANDIRA ROAD,
BELAVATTA VILLAGE, RBI POST,
MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE - 570 003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1
SERVICE OF NOTICE AGAINST R2 IS H/S V/O DT.29.04.2025)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 26.03.2025 PASSED BY VI
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU CITY, IN
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
CRL.A No. 821 of 2025
HC-KAR
SPL.C.NO.85/2025 REJECTING BAIL TO THE APPELLANT AND ORDER
THE RELEASE OF THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.85/2025
ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.138/2024 OF METAGALLI P.S., FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/S 103(1), 238, 351(2), 49, 61(2), 189(2), 190 OF
BNS, 2023, U/S 3(1)(R)(S) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015.
THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
ORALJUDGMENT
The appellant - accused No.6 is before this Court seeking
grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST Act' for short) in Crime
No.138/2024 of Metagalli Police Station, Mysuru, pending
before the learned VI Additional District and Special Judge,
Mysuru City in Spl.Case.No.85/2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 351(2), 49, 61(2),
189(2) and 190 of BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST
(POA) Amendment Act, 2015 on the basis of the first
information lodged by informant-Smt. Radha.H.
2. Heard Sri. Tony Sebastian, learned Senior Advocate
for Sri. Reny Sebastin, learned counsel for the appellant and
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
CRL.A No. 821 of 2025
HC-KAR
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 appellants are entitled for
grant of bail under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the
following:
REASONS
4. Respondent No.2 - the informant has filed the first
information with Metagalli police against accused Nos. 1 to 12
and others on 22.12.2024 alleging that accused Nos. 1 to 8
have committed the offence punishable under Section
3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 and Sections
351(2), 189(2) read with 190 of BNS on 05.11.2024. It is also
stated that in furtherance of the same, accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7
and 8 have conspired on 08.11.2024 to do away with the life of
the deceased. Accordingly, on 22.11.2024, accused No.1
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
CRL.A No. 821 of 2025
HC-KAR
proceeded in his motor bike along with accused No.2, dashed
the same to the motor cycle ridden by the deceased and later
stabbed him with a dragger, as a result of which, he died.
5. Column No.17 of the charge sheet makes it clear
that the appellant was involved in commission of the offence as
alleged on 05.11.2024, but no complaint was filed pursuant to
the same. It was only on 22.12.2024, when accused No.1
stabbed the deceased with the dragger and caused his death,
the first information came to be filed. However, there is no
reference to the present appellant being part of the criminal
conspiracy with the co-accused or being part of causing the
death of the deceased.
6. It is stated that except accused No.1, who is the
assailant, all other accused are already enlarged on bail. The
bail application filed by the appellant was rejected solely on the
ground that, he is having criminal antecedents. Learned Senior
Advocate for the appellant submits that out of 13 cases noted
in the order passed by the Trial Court, in 8 cases the appellant
is already acquitted. In one of the cases, B-report is filed. In
other four cases, the trial is in progress before the Trial Court.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
CRL.A No. 821 of 2025
HC-KAR
7. Even though serious allegations are made against
the accused, specific overt act of causing the death of the
deceased was by accused No.1 in the presence of accused
No.2. Conspiracy to cause death of the deceased was by
accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8. 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.
8. 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.138/2024 of Metagalli Police Station, Mysuru, 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.
NC: 2025:KHC:19415
HC-KAR
b). The appellant shall not threaten or tamper
with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The appellant shall appear before the Court
as and when required.
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
SPV
