Karnataka High Court
Sachin T O vs State By Tarikere Town Police on 16 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
CRL.A No. 900 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 900 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
SACHIN T.O.
S/O ONKARASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT CHOWDESHWARI COLONY,
TARIKERE TOWN, CHIKKAMAGALURU
DISTRICT - 577 228
(NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY)
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR M.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY TARIKERE TOWN POLICE
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BANGALORE - 560 001.
Digitally
signed by
SWAPNA V 2. SHEKAR
Location: S/O. SANNAPPA
High Court of AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
Karnataka R/AT 2ND CROSS, OPP: CHURCH
KODI CAMP, TARIKERE TOWN,
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1
R2 - SD)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN
SPECIAL CASE NO.24/2023, FOR THE O/P/U/S 143, 144, 149, 147,
148, 323, 302, 212 R/W 34 OF IPC R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND
SECTIONS 3(2) (VA) AND 3 (2)(VII) OF THE SC AND ST
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
CRL.A No. 900 of 2025
HC-KAR
(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT OF THE RESPONDENT TARIKERE
TOWN POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU.
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.5 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.253/2022 of Tarikere Town Police Station, Chikkamagaluru,
pending in Spl.Case No.24/2023 on the file of the learned I
Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Chikkamagaluru,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144,
149, 147, 148, 323, 302, 212 read with Section 34 of IPC and
Sections 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(viii) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (POA) Amendment Act, 2015, on the basis of
the first information lodged by informant - Shekar.
2. Heard Sri. Harish Kumar M.C, learned counsel for
the appellant and Sri. Harish Ganapathy, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Perused the
materials on record.
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
HC-KAR
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 14A(2) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the
following:
REASONS
4. The appellant being accused No.5 along with
accused Nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to 10 are charge sheeted for the
offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 149, 147, 148,
323, 302, 212 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections
3(2)(va) and 3(2)(viii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. It is stated that the
appellant was apprehended on 23.11.2022 and since then, he
is in judicial custody. Initially, the appellant had filed
Crl.A.No.798/2023 seeking similar relief and the same came to
be dismissed. Again he had preferred an appeal in
Crl.A.No.869/2023. The said appeal also came to be dismissed.
The order sheet in the earlier criminal appeals disclose that, the
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
HC-KAR
Co-ordinate Benches of this Court rejected the claim of the
appellant for grant of bail, solely on the ground that CW-24 is
the eye-witness. His statement was recorded by the
Investigating Officer under Section 161 of Cr.PC. His statement
was also recorded by the learned Magistrate under Section 164
of Cr.PC. Since he is the eye-witness to the incident, who
stated that the appellant-accused No.5 is the assailant who
caused the death of the deceased it was held that he is not
entitled for grant of bail.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has taken the
Court through the statement of CW-24 recorded by the
Investigating Officer under Section 161 of Cr.PC and statement
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC recorded by the learned
Magistrate, wherein, the eye-witness stated that he came to
the spot and saw that the accused were quarrelling with the
deceased. But he also states that, since there was quarrel
between the two, he left the place on his motorcycle and came
to know about death of the deceased only on the next day.
Under such circumstances, it cannot be stated at this stage that
it was only accused Nos. 4 and 5 have inflicted fatal injuries
which resulted in death of the deceased.
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
HC-KAR
6. Admittedly, accused Nos.1 to 3, 6 to 10 are already
on bail.
7. It is stated that the charge was framed by the Trial
Court on 11.06.2023 and till now, PW-1 is examined in part.
There are in all 41 witnesses to be examined by the
prosecution. Under such circumstances, detention of the
appellant in custody would amount to infringement to his right
to life and liberty. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the
appellant may be granted bail on parity with other accused,
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.253/2022 of Tarikere Town Police Station, Chikkamagaluru,
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:
NC: 2025:KHC:20593
HC-KAR
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.
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
