[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Santhosh S vs State Of Karnataka on 4 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
CRL.A No. 89 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 89 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1. SANTHOSH S
S/O. SOMASHETTI,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/A HULUGUNDI VILLAGE,
MADIHALLI HOBLI,
BELURU TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
2. KESHAVAMURTHY
S/O. SIDDASHETTI
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/A HULUGUNDI VILLAGE,
MADIHALLI HOBLI,
BELURU TALUK,
Digitally signed by HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: HIGH ...APPELLANTS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA. (BY SRI. HONNESHA B.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HALEBEEDU POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. RAGHU H,
S/O.HANUMAIAH,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
CRL.A No. 89 of 2026
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/A HULUGUNDI VILLAGE,
MADIHALLI HOBLI,
BELURU TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.01.2026
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.21/2026 BY THE LD. I ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPL. JUDGE AT HASSAN AND
CONSEQUENTLY ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS ON ANTICIPATORY
BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF ARREST, WHO ARE THE ACCUSED
NO.3 AND 4, IN CR.NO.195/2025, HALEBEEDU P.S. PENDING
ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
P/U/S. 109, 115(2), 126(2) 352, 3(5) OF BNS ACT, 2023 AND
AND U/S. 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (PA) AMENDMENT
ACT, 2015.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Notice is duly served as per the report submitted by
the police Superintendent, Hassan District.
2. Respondent No.2 called out, remained absent
and unrepresented.
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
HC-KAR
3. The appellants who are accused Nos. 3 and 4
have preferred this appeal against the impugned order
passed by the first Additional District and Sessions Judge
and Special Judge, Hassan, in Crl.Misc.No.21/2022 dated
14.01.2026.
4. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal
are that on the basis of a complaint filed by one Raghu H.,
Halebeedu police have registered a case in Crime
No.195/2025 against the accused Nos. 1 to 4 for the
commission of offence under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2)
352, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under
Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of Schedule Caste and
Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act,
2015.
5. The appellants have filed application under
Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
for grant of anticipatory bail, same came to be rejected by
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
HC-KAR
the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the rejection of bail,
appellants have preferred this appeal.
6. I have heard the arguments of both sides and
examined the materials placed before this Court.
7. On the basis of the complaint filed by Raghu H.,
the Halebeedu police have registered a case in Crime No.
195/2025 against accused Nos. 1 to 4 for the offence
punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2) 352, 3(5)
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections
3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. It is
alleged in the complaint that on 30.12.2005 at 3.00 p.m.
when the complainant was proceeding on a bike along with
Raju, the accused Ravi wrongfully restrained him and
abused and asked him as to the abusing of his father near
diary. Then he told him that he has not abused his father.
Then Gopi-accused No.2 brought iron rod from his car and
all of a sudden gave a blow to the complainant on his head
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
HC-KAR
and back. Ravi has brought iron rods from his scooty and
assaulted the complainant on his right and left arms. The
brother-in-law of Gopi, accused No.3 Santosh came in a
bike and pushed the complainant and all the accused
abused the complainant in filthy language by referring his
caste. The role of the accused No.3 is that, he pushed the
complainant. Accused No.4 has abused the complainant in
filthy language by referring his caste.
8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
appellant that the injured has already been discharged
from the hospital, Discharge Summary issued by the Sri.
Chamarajendra HIMS Teaching Hospital, Hassan is
produced.
9. A plain reading of the complaint does not reveal
as to the presence of public while abusing the complainant
by the accused by referring his caste. At this stage, there
are no prima facie materials to constitute the penal
provisions of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
HC-KAR
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Considering the role
of accused Nos.3 and 4, previous antecedents of these
accused, nature and gravity of the offence, it is just and
proper to allow this appeal.
10. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order passed by the I
Additional District and Sessions Judge and
Special Judge, Hassan in
Crl.Misc.No.21/2026 dated 14.01.2016 is
set aside.
(iii) Consequently application filed under
Section 482 of BNSS filed on behalf of
appellants Nos. 1 and 2 who are accused
Nos. 3 and 4, is allowed.
(iv) The appellants shall be released on bail in
the event of their arrest in Crime
No.195/2025 of Halebeedu Police on
NC: 2026:KHC:6745
HC-KAR
executing a self bond of Rs.50,000/- each
with one surety to the satisfaction of trial
Court.
(v) Appellants shall not tamper or threaten
the prosecution witness in any manner.
(vi) Appellants shall assist investigating officer
for his investigation.
(vii) Appellants shall not indulge in the similar
offence.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
BVK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
