SRI SUBRAMANYA Y M S/O MANJUNATHA YAMAGURU vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE RAJESHWARI N.HEGDE
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100490 OF 2026
(U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST ACT)
BETWEEN:
SRI SUBRAMANYA Y.M.
S/O MANJUNATHA YAMAGURU
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/O. KANNANGI VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS PROGRAMME OFFICER,
HADAGALI VALAYA 2, SKDRDP (BC) TRUST,
HADAGALI, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT 570032.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHRIKANT T. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,
HADAGALI POLICE STATION, HADAGALI TALUK,
VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DAHRWAD BENCH DHARWAD 580001.
2. SMT. NARASAMMA W/O LATE KUBENDRA KUMAR H.,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. JCR BADAWANE, JAGALURU,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, KARNATAKA 577001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. VIDYASHANKAR G. DALWAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT, 1989 AND SECTION 482 OF THE BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.09.2026
ROHAN
HADIMANI
T
Digitally signed by ROHAN
HADIMANI T
Location: HIGH COURT OF
KARNATAKA DHARWAD
BENCH
Date: 2026.11.13 16:17:34
+0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
IN CRL. MISC. NO.534/2026 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT, HOSAPETE,
INSOFAR AS IT REJECTS THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION OF
THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.94/2026 OF
HADAGALI POLICE STATION OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC.108 AND
352 READ WITH SECTION 3 (5) BNS AND SECTIONS 3(1) (R),
3(1)(S) 3(2)(V) OF THE SC/ST ACT AND UPON FINDING THAT THE
BAR UNDER SECTIONS 18 AND 18A OF THE SC/ST ACT IS NOT
ATTRACTED, DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RELEASE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN HADAGALI
POLICE STATION CRIME NO.94/2026, REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 108 AND 352 READ WITH SECTION
3(5) BNS AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) 3(2)(v) OF THE SC/ST
ACT, ON SUCH BOND, SURETY AND CONDITIONS AS THIS COURT
CONSIDERS APPROPRIATE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE RAJESHWARI N.HEGDE
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellant/accused No.1 being aggrieved by
the order dated 23.09.2026 passed in Crl. Misc.
No.534/2026 by the learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Vijayanagara District, Hosapete, rejecting
his application for anticipatory bail in connection with
Crime No.94/2026 registered by Hadagali Police Station
for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 352
read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
2023 (for short, ‘the BNS’), and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the
SC/ST Act’), has approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail.
2. The facts, in brief are that the complainant who
is the wife of the deceased lodged a complaint on
03.09.2026 at 11:30 a.m. alleging that, her husband, the
deceased herein, was working under SKDRDP, wherein
accused No.1 was working as a Programme Officer and he
was the superior officer. It is alleged that, the deceased
belonged to the Scheduled Caste community and accused
No.1 used to abuse him by referring to his caste, also
alleging that he was not discharging his duties properly
and was frequently availing leave.
3. It is further alleged that the deceased was
having an illicit relationship with one Asha, who is arrayed
as accused No.2 and she was also harassing him.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
4. On account of the mental harassment allegedly
meted out to him by the accused, the deceased took the
extreme step of committing suicide. Hence, the
complainant alleged that accused No.1 was responsible for
the death of her husband and lodged the complaint.
5. Heard Sri. Shrikant T. Patil, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant, Sri. Abhishek Malipatil,
learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) appearing
for respondent No.1, and Sri. Vidyashankar G. Dalwai,
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
6. Perused the records.
7. On the basis of the said complaint, the police
registered the crime for the aforesaid offences and
commenced investigation. The appellant by apprehending
his arrest in connection with the said crime, approached
the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge by filing
an application seeking anticipatory bail. However, the said
application came to be rejected and hence the present
appeal.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
8. In this appeal, learned HCGP entered
st nd
appearance for 1 respondent-State. 2 respondent is the
complainant and represented by the learned advocate.
Both have registered the appeal by filing objections.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1
contended that the learned Sessions Judge, relying upon
the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Shajan Skaria
v. State of Kerala and Aothers reported in 2024 SCC
Online SC 2249 observed that, in view of Section 18 of
the SC/ST Act there is a statutory bar against granting
anticipatory bail to the accused and accordingly rejected
the application.
10. Learned counsel further contended that, though
there is a bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, the
Hon’ble Apex Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of
India , has held that where the complaint does not make
out a prima facie case for the applicability of the provisions
of the SC/ST Act, the bar created under Sections 18 and
18A of the said Act would not apply, and the Court would
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
not be precluded from granting pre-arrest bail to the
accused. Therefore, referring to the averments made in
the complaint, learned counsel submitted that no prima
facie case is made out against the appellant for the alleged
offences under the SC/ST Act and as such, he is entitled to
the relief of anticipatory bail.
11. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader (HCGP) as well as learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.2/complainant, contended that, the
accused had been harassing the deceased for the last
three to four months prior to the incident and was
frequently abusing him by referring to his caste, thereby
subjecting him to mental cruelty. It is further contended
that, there is a direct nexus between the alleged
harassment and the suicide committed by the deceased.
Therefore, having regard to the bar under Sections 18 and
18A of the SC/ST Act, the learned Sessions Judge was
justified in rejecting the application for anticipatory bail.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
12. Learned HCGP further submitted that, soon
after registration of the crime the accused absconded and
did not cooperate with the investigation. It is also
submitted that, the investigation has been completed and
the charge sheet has already been filed.
13. Further, learned HCGP referring to the
statement of the brother of the deceased submitted that,
he had elaborately narrated the manner in which accused
No.1 had subjected the deceased to mental cruelty, which
ultimately drove him to commit suicide. Hence, it is
contended that the appellant is not entitled to anticipatory
bail.
14. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
appellant referring to the averments made in the
complaint submitted that, apart from the general
allegations of harassment against accused No.1 the
complaint also refers to the alleged illicit relationship
between the deceased and accused No.2 namely, Asha
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
and the harassment allegedly meted out to the deceased
by her by extracting money from him.
15. It is further submitted that, the investigation
has already been completed and the charge sheet has
been filed. Learned counsel also submitted that, if the
presence of the appellant is required for any further
investigation, he is ready and willing to appear before the
Investigating Officer and cooperate with the investigation.
Hence, it is prayed that the appellant may be enlarged on
anticipatory bail subject to such stringent conditions as
this Court may deem fit to impose.
16. Having heard the learned counsel for the
appellant, learned HCGP and learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.2/complainant, upon perusal of the
material available on record it is seen that, the allegations
against accused No.1 are primarily with regard to the
alleged harassment meted out to the deceased. It is also
relevant to note that the deceased was working under
SKDRDP, which is stated to be an organisation functioning
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
on the basis of public trust and is not a Government office.
Further, it is stated that the accused and the deceased
were not working in the same office premises.
17. Having regard to the nature of the allegations,
the material available on record, the fact that the
investigation has already been completed and the charge
sheet has been filed, and also the submission made on
behalf of the appellant that, he is ready and willing to
cooperate with the Investigating Officer, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the appellant has made out a
case for grant of anticipatory bail, subject to stringent
conditions and accordingly this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed .
The order dated 23.09.2026 passed in Crl. Misc.
No.534/2026 by the learned Additional District and
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
Sessions Judge, Vijayanagara District, Hosapete, is set
aside.
The appellant/accused No.1 is directed to appear
before the jurisdictional Court within 15 days from the
date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and execute
a personal bond for a sum of ₹2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
Lakhs only), with two sureties for the like sum subject to
the following conditions:
i. The appellant shall not tamper with the
prosecution witnesses or threaten them in any
manner.
ii. The appellant shall cooperate with the
investigation and appear before the Investigating
Officer whenever his presence is required for any
further investigation, upon receipt of notice.
iii. The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of
the Trial Court without prior permission of the
Trial Court.
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18472
CRL.A No. 100490 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020181572026
iv. The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court
on all dates of hearing, unless his presence is
exempted.
v. The appellant shall not involve himself in any
similar offences.
vi. The appellant shall furnish his correct residential
address and contact details to the Investigating
Officer and the jurisdictional Court and shall
intimate any change therein.
Sd/-
(RAJESHWARI N.HEGDE)
JUDGE
AC
CT-CMU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 8