Karnataka High Court
Sri Swamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
CRL.A No. 200052 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200052 OF 2025 (U/S 14-A(2))
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SWAMY S/O SANNA KOLUMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. SRI DODDA KOLUMAPPA S/O SAYANNA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
3. SMT. SHANTAMMA W/O HANUMANTHA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
4. SMT. ANJINAMMA W/O YALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
5. SMT. SUSHEELA W/O EARANNA,
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH ALL ARE R/O. SARJAPUR VILLAGE,
COURT OF TQ. AND DIST. RAICHUR-584101.
KARNATAKA
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH SHO YAPALDINNI POLICE STATION,
TQ. AND DIST. RAICHUR,
BY ITS ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT BENCH, KALABURAGI-585102.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
CRL.A No. 200052 of 2025
2. SRI GOVINDA S/O HANUMANTHA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SARJAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. RAICHUR-584101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI B.K. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (PA)
ACT, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
12.02.2025 IN CRL.MISC.NO.56/2025 (ARISING OUT OF CRIME
NO.05/2025) PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR CASES
UNDER THE SC AND ST (POA) ACT AND I ADDL. DIST. AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, AT RAICHUR BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL
CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE APPELLANTS/ ACCUSED NO.2,
4, 10, 12 AND 13 ON BAIL IN CRIME NO. 05/2025 PENDING ON
THE FILE OF SPECIAL COURT FOR CASES UNDER THE SC AND
ST (POA) ACT AND I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
RAICHUR FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
U/SEC. 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 119, 352,
351(2) R/W 190 OF BNS AND SEC. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT BILL 2015, REGISTERED BY THE
RESPONDENT YAPALADINNI P.S.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)
This appeal is filed by the appellants/accused Nos.2,
4, 10, 12 and 13 being aggrieved by the order dated
12.02.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.56/2025 by the learned
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
Special Court for Cases under the SC and ST (POA) Act
and I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raichur.
Brief facts of the case are:
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the
complainant has stated in his complaint that he is the
resident of Sarjapur village, Raichur District and he is an
agriculturist by profession. It is stated in the complaint
that the land bearing Survey No.57, measuring 28 acres 6
guntas of Kortipli village, Raichur district was a
Government land. There is a dispute between the
complainant and accused No.1 - Yallappa, in respect of
the said land which was pending before various
authorities. It is further stated that the Revenue Inspector
and the Village Accountant said to have directed accused
No.1 - Yallappa not to cultivate the Government land. In
spite of direction issued to said Yallappa not to cultivate
the land, the said Yallappa and his associates were
cultivating the land on 26.01.2025 during night hours.
Having noticed the act said Yallappa, the family members
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
of the complainant went to the spot along with the
complainant and asked Yallappa to stop the cultivation of
the land.
3. It is further stated that the said Yallappa and
others said to have assaulted the complainant and his
family member and caused injuries. Therefore, a case
came to be registered against Yallappa and others. The
jurisdictional police after registering the case and
conducted the investigation.
4. Heard learned counsel Arunkumar
Amargundappa for the appellants, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and learned
counsel Sri B.K.Hiremath for respondent No.2
5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the
appellants that the appellants are innocent of the alleged
offences and no independent witnesses have been cited in
the case. The involvement of the appellants in the alleged
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
incident is doubtful and they have been dragged into this
case in order to knock off the property by the complainant.
6. It is further submitted that the alleged incident
had taken place in the odd hours i.e., early in the
morning. It was dark and overt-act of each accused
cannot be assessed by the complainant and others.
Therefore, the allegations made against these appellants
appear to be doubtful and therefore, the appeal may be
allowed and appellants may be enlarged on bail by
imposing suitable conditions.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader has vehemently opposed the submission of
learned counsel for the appellants and he further
submitted that the appellants are very powerful persons
and also financially stable. The complainant and his family
members belong to weaker section and were directed to
cultivate the land, which is subject matter of the dispute.
The appellants and his family members even though had
restrained from cultivating the land in dispute, they
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
deliberately with an intention to knock off the property
entered the land at night hours and started cultivating by
ignoring direction issued by the Revenue Authorities.
8. It is further submitted that when the appellants
were asked to stop the cultivating of the said land, they
started assaulting the complainant and his family
members. Consequently, the complainant and his family
members have sustained injuries. Further, the appellants
herein have scolded by naming the caste of the
complainant. Therefore, the appeal has to be rejected.
9. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 adopted
the argument of learned High Court Government Pleader
and he further submitted that when allegations are made
against the appellants are serious in nature and also
heinous in nature, in order to protect the interest of the
society at large the appeal has to be rejected by upholding
the order passed by the Sessions Court. Making such
submission, he prays to reject the appeal.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
10. Having heard the learned counsel for respective
parties and also perused the averments of the complaint,
it appears from the record that the dispute between the
complainant and accused persons was in respect of the
property bearing Survey No.57, measuring 28 acres 6
guntas situated at Kortipli village, Raichur district. Though
the alleged incident had taken place in the disputed land,
the time on which the incident had taken place has to be
considered at this stage.
11. Even though it is stated in the complaint that
appellants herein had also actively participated and
assaulted and abused by naming the caste of the
complainant, the fact remains that appellant No.2 is aged
70 years and the appellant Nos.3, 4 and 5 are women. As
the incident had taken place in the odd hours, assessing
the overt-act of each accused cannot be possible. Be that
as it may, on perusal of the averments of complaint, I am
of the considered opinion that the appellants have made
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
out a case to allow the appeal. Hence, I proceed to pass
the following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed.
The impugned order passed by the learned Special
Court for cases under the SC and ST (POA) Act and I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raichur in
Crl.Misc.No.56/2025 dated 12.02.2025 is set aside.
The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in
Crime No.5/2025 of Yapaladinni Police Station, Raichur,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections
189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 119, 352, 351(2)
read with Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and under Sections
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015,
subject to the following conditions:
a) The appellants shall execute personal bonds for a
sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety each
for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1499
b) The appellants shall not threaten the prosecution
witnesses.
c) The appellants shall not hamper the Court
proceedings.
d) The appellants shall not involve in any other
criminal cases in future till disposal of the case.
e) The appellants shall appear before the Trail Court
on all hearing dates without fail.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
SRT
CT:PK
