Karnataka High Court
Sri Mohammed Fayaz Ahamed vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
CRL.A No. 953 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 953 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
SRI. MOHAMMED FAYAZ AHAMED
S/O. MOHAMMED FAROOQ
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT NO.230, 7TH CROSS,
B BLOCK, SUBHASHNAGAR,
BEGUR, BANGALORE - 560 068
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SUPRITHA K.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY PARAPPANA
AGRAHARA POLICE STATION BANGALORE
CITY BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY
SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Digitally BENGALURU - 560 001
signed by
SWAPNA V 2. SMT. GOWRAMMA
Location: High W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA,
Court of
Karnataka AGED ABOUT MAJOR,
R/AT NO.324, C K NAGAR
HOSA ROAD, SINGASANDRA
VILLAGE, BANGALORE - 560 100
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO 1. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE
LXX ACC AND SJ SPECIAL JUDGE, AT BANGALORE (CCH-71) IN
CRL.MISC.NO.2763/2025, DATED 04.04.2025. 2. TO ALLOW THE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
CRL.A No. 953 of 2025
HC-KAR
ABOVE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED
NO.2 ON BAIL AND DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS POLICE
(PARAPPANA AGRAHARA POLICE BANGALORE) TO RELEASE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN
CR.NO.554/2024, FOR THE O/P/U/S 118(1), 74, 351(2), 351, 352
R/W 3(5) OF BNS ACT, R/W U/S 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(V-A) OF SC
AND ST (POA) ACT.
THIS CRL.A., COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appellant-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking
grant of anticipatory 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 Act'
for short) in the event of his arrest in Crime No.554/2024 of
Parappana Agrahara Police Station, pending before the learned
LXX ACC and SJ Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-71) in
Crl.Misc.No.2763/2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 118(1), 3(5), 329(4), 351, and 79 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS Act') and under Sections
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST Act, on the basis of the
first information lodged by informant-Smt.Gowramma.
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
HC-KAR
2. Heard Smt.Supritha K.H., learned Counsel for the
appellant and Sri. Harish Ganapathy, learned High Court
Government Pleader 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 SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the
following:
REASONS
4. The informant has filed the first information against
accused No.1 and another for having committed the offences as
stated above. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be
filed. It is the specific contention of the prosecution that CW.1
belongs to Scheduled Caste. Accused Nos.1 and 2 had illegally
trespassed into the house of CW.1. Accused No.1 abused her in
filthy language, took a knife, stabbed and caused her injuries
and in the meantime, accused No.2 gave a reaper piece to
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
HC-KAR
accused No.1, with which, accused No.1 again assaulted CW.1
and abused her again by referring to her caste with an intention
to humiliate her, criminally intimidated to take away her life
and, also pulled her saree and tried to outrage her modesty.
Accused Nos.1 and 2 gave a threat to CW.1 against giving
police complaint and to face the consequences if such an
attempt is made.
5. It is stated that accused No.1 is already enlarged on
bail. The wound certificate produced by the learned counsel for
the appellant discloses that CW.1 has sustained four injuries,
which are simple in nature. It is not the contention of the
prosecution that the appellant is having any criminal
antecedents or required for further investigation. It is pertinent
to note that the allegation for having abused CW.1 in filthy
language by referring to her caste with an intention to cause
humiliation, is directed against accused No.1. Considering all
these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the
appellant may be granted anticipatory bail subject to
conditions, which will take care of the interest of the
prosecution as well as interest of the complainant and the
witnesses.
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
HC-KAR
6. 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 the
event of his arrest in Crime No.554/2024 of Parappana
Agrahara Police Station.
The appellant is directed to appear before the
Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of
this order and on his appearance, the Investigating Officer shall
enlarge him on bail subject to the following conditions:-
a. The appellant shall furnish the bonds in a sum
of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only)
each with two sureties each for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;
b. The appellant shall not commit similar
offences;
NC: 2025:KHC:19852
HC-KAR
c. The appellant shall appear before the
Investigating Officer or the court as and when
required; and
d. The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the
prosecution witnesses.
On furnishing the sureties by the appellant, the
Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the
addresses and authenticity of the documents furnished by
them. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed
to accept the sureties within a reasonable time.
Sd/-
(M G UMA)
JUDGE
MKM
