Karnataka High Court
Srimant vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 June, 2025
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3453
CRL.A No. 200144 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200144 OF 2025 (U/S 14 (A))
BETWEEN:
SRIMANT
S/O GURU URF GURUNATH NATIKAR,
AGE:35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KESARLAL TANDA NO.2,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
SUMITRA
SHERIGAR THROUGH INDI POLICE STATION,
Location: HIGH REP. BY,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585102.
2. ASHOK S/O RAVU RATHOD,
AGE:45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KESARLAL TANDA NO. 2,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VJIAYAPUR-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3453
CRL.A No. 200144 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14-A (2) OF SC/ST (PA)
ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED
BY THE II ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA IN
CRL.MISC PETITION NO. 278/2024 U/SEC. 439 CR.P.C WHICH
CAME TO BE REJECTED ON 07-03-2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY
BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY
GRANTING BAIL AND TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN
SPL.(AC) NO.16/2020 FOR AN OFFENCE U/S 341, 323, 504,
506 AND 302 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1) (R)(S) OF THE
SC/ST (PA) AMENDMENT ACT 2015, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE VIJAYAPURA IN SPL
(AC) CASE NO.16/2020.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA)
1. Heard Sri. Subhash Mallapur, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant and learned High Court
Government pleader for the respondent-State.
2. Office has raised an objection with regard to non-
filing of certified copy of the FIR. It is noticed that, the
accused/petitioner is facing trial in Special Case SC/ST
No.16/2020. He applied for grant of bail in Crl. Misc.
No.278/2024, wherein, the learned Special Judge, dismissed
the same by order dated 07.03.2024.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3453
HC-KAR
3. Under the scheme of Section 14A of Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') any order
including the rejection of the bail would be an appealable
order under Section 14A of the Act. Section 14A of the Act,
reads as under:
14A. Appeals.--
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the
Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal
shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or order, not
being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an
Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts
and on law.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (3) of section 378 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the
High Court against an order of the Special Court or the
Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any
other law for the time being in force, every appeal under
this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety
days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order
appealed from:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3453
HC-KAR
Provided that the High Court may entertain an
appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days
if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for
not preferring the appeal within the period of ninety
days:
Provided further that no appeal shall be
entertained after the expiry of the period of one hundred
and eighty days.
(4) Every appeal preferred under sub-section
(1) shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a
period of three months from the date of admission of
the appeal.
4. Sub-section 3 of Section 14A of the Act would
make it clear that, notwithstanding anything contained in any
other law for the time being in force, the appeal under Section
14A shall be preferred within a period of 90 days from the
date of Judgment, sentence or order appealed from.
5. The second proviso to sub-section 3 of Section
14A of the Act, would make it clear that, after expiry of 180
days, no appeal is maintainable at all.
6. Therefore, even assuming that the office
objections are to be cured, the present appeal having been
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3453
HC-KAR
preferred questioning the validity of the order dated
07.03.2024 is not maintainable in view of second proviso to
sub-section 3 of Section 14A of the Act.
7. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is not maintainable and
hereby dismissed;
(ii) However, this shall not come in the
way of the appellant filing a fresh application
before the trial Court and if any adverse orders
are challenged the same, within a period of
limitation as is prescribed under Section 14A of
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
(iii) Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
SVH
