Karnataka High Court
Sri. Shiva Kumar M vs State Of Karnataka on 20 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1026 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHIVA KUMAR .M
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
S/O. MAHADEVA SWAMY,
R/AT NO.79, 6TH MAIN ROAD,
GANESHA TEMPLE, BHAVYA
BHARATHA LAYOUT, SRIRAMPURA
2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570 023.
CURRENTLY RESIDING AT:
KUMUDHA P.G., NO.10,
80 FT. ROAD, BHUVANESHWARI
NAGAR, BSK 3RD STAGE,
BANGALORE - 560 085.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. C.V. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by AND:
SWAPNA V
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
High Court of
Karnataka SUBRAMANYAPURA POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE. REPRESENTED BY
SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE - 01.
2. SMT. PALLAVI .S
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
W/O SRI. SHIVA KUMAR .M
D/O SRI. SIDDARAJU,
NO. 725/1-4, SAI ANURAG,
6TH CROSS, 1ST 'A' MAIN,
KHB SOCIETY LAYOUT,
KATHRIGUPPE, BSK 3RD STAGE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
CRL.A No. 1026 of 2025
HC-KAR
BANGALORE - 560 085.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1
SRI. H. MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.04.2025 PASSED BY
THE HONBLE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPECIAL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-71) REJECTING THE PETITION IN
CRL.MISC.NO.3145/2025 FILED BY APPELLANT HEREIN U/S 482 OF
THE BNSS AND TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE
APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST
IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.151/2025 REGISTERED AT RESPONDENT
POLICE STATION ON THE BASIS OF COMPLAINT OF RESPONDENT
NO.2, FOR THE OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE PENAL U/S 85, 351(2),
352, 3(5) OF BNS AND SEC. 3 AND 4 OF DP ACT, AND SEC.
3(2)(VA), 3(1)(R) AND 3(1)(S) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989.
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 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 the
event of their arrest in Crime No.151/2025 of Subramanyapura
Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
HC-KAR
Sections 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act on the basis of the first information
lodged by informant-Smt. Pallavi.S.
2. Heard Sri. C.V.Srinivasa, learned Counsel for the
appellant, Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned Additional SPP for
respondent No.1-State and Sri. H.Mohan Kumar, learned
counsel for respondent No.2. 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 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 wife of the appellant has filed the first
information alleging commission of the offences punishable
under Sections 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
HC-KAR
and 4 of DP Act and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the
SC & ST Act. It is the contention of the complainant that she
was in love with accused No.1 since 2016 and they got married
on 19.11.2023. She refers to few incidents that had occurred
before marriage to contend that she was humiliated by the
accused referring to her caste. She also states that even after
marriage, she was not treated properly and she was humiliated
by the accused.
5. It is pertinent to note that the informant is
employee in State Bank of India and the appellant is working in
GESCOM, Bellari. It is not the contention of the prosecution
that the appellant is required for further investigation.
Admittedly, accused Nos. 2 to 4 are already on bail.
Considering the nature of the allegations and the relationship
between the parties, 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.
6. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the
affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
HC-KAR
ORDER
The appeal is allowed.
The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the
event of his arrest in Crime No.151/2025 of Subramanyapura
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 their appearance, the Investigating Officer
shall enlarge them 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;
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:21475
HC-KAR
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
SPV
