Karnataka High Court
Chandan C vs State By on 16 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
CRL.A No. 1115 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. 1115 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
CHANDAN C
S/O CHIDANANDA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
BARBER WORK, R/AT 2ND CROSS
NARAYANAPURA
BASAVANAHALLI MAIN ROAD
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY
WOMEN POLICE STATION,
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Digitally
signed by HIGH COURT BUILDING
SWAPNA V BANGALORE - 01
Location:
High Court of 2. RAKSHITHA B.R.
Karnataka
D/O RAVINDRA
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
R/AT SOMESHWARANAGARA
NEAR SREELEKHA TALKIES
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL.SPP FOR R1
R2 - SD)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2)
OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 14.05.2025 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. SESSION JUDGE AT
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
CRL.A No. 1115 of 2025
HC-KAR
CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRIME NO.39/2025 CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE
THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL, REGISTERED WOMEN POLICE
STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 69, 351(2), 352 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF
BNS ACT AND SECTION 3(1)(R)(S) AND 3(1)(W)(II) OF SC/ST /ACT
IN CRIME NO.39/25.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, 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 Act' for short) in Crime
No.39 of 2025 of Chickmagalur Women Police Station,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 352,
351(2) read with 3(5) of BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s),
3(1)(w)(ii) of SC/ST Act, on the basis of the first information
lodged by informant - B R Rakshitha.
2. Heard Sri Girish B Baladare, learned counsel for the
appellants and Smt Rashmi Jadhav, learned Additional SPP for
respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on record.
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
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 appellants are 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 appellant - accused No.1 is seeking grant of
bail. It is the contention of respondent No.2 - informant that
she came in contact with accused No.1 - the appellant herein
through social media and the appellant promised to marry her.
They had physical relationship at first instance on 16.12.2021
on such promise to marry. Subsequently, their relationship
continued. When she insisted for marrying her, the appellant
and his family members started abusing and criminally
intimidating her. The appellant refused to marry her. She filed
a complaint with Women Police Station on 05.01.2024. There
was an enquiry by the police and the appellant promised to
marry her. Later, the appellant and his family members abused
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
HC-KAR
her in filthy language by making whatsapp call and also refused
to marry her. Therefore, she filed first information for the
above said offences.
5. It is the contention of the appellant that the
informant is a major aged 23 years. According to the
informant, the incident occurred on 16.12.2021. Belatedly i.e.,
after lapse of four years, the present complaint came to be
filed. Prima facie, it is a consensual relationship. But now the
informant is pressurizing the appellant and his family members
to agree for the promise made by the appellant. However, the
said contention taken by the appellants is to be considered by
the Investigating Officer.
6. It is stated that the appellant was apprehended on
22.05.2025 and since then he is in judicial custody. It is not
the contention of learned Additional SPP that the appellant is
required for custodial interrogation. The allegations made
against the appellant do not require him to be detained in
custody indefinitely. The appellant is not having any criminal
antecedents. Therefore, I am of the opinion, that the appellant
may be granted bail subject to conditions, which will take care
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
HC-KAR
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.39 of 2025 of Chickmagalur Women 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.
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:20635
HC-KAR
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
*bgn/-
CT:VS
