SRI MANJUNATH @ MAHANTAYYA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200315 OF 2026 (U/S 14 (A))
BETWEEN:
SRI MANJUNATH @ MAHANTAYYA S/O SHARABAYYA,
AGE: 20 YEARS, R/O: RAKAMGERA,
TQ: SHAHAPUR,
DISTRICT: YADGIR – 585 223.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI B. BHIMASHANKAR & SRI PRADEEP KUMAR,
ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH SHAHAPUR POLICE STATION,
R/BY. THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH – 585 102.
2. SRI KASHAPPA S/O DEVINDRAPPA SHIKARI,
AGE : 45 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O: FILTER BED AREA SHAHAPUR,
TQ : SHAHAPUR,
DIST : YADGIR – 585 223.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SIDDALING P. PATIL, ADDL. SPP, FOR R1;
R2-V/O DATED 15.10.2026 NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF SC/ST
(PA) ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.09.2026 PASSED BY THE
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
YADGIR IN CRIME NO.226/2026, REJECTING THE
APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER SECTION 483
OF BNSS, CONSEQUENTLY, ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/
ACCUSED NO.4 ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.226/2026 OF
SHAHAPUR POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2),
119(1), 352 AND 351(2), READ WITH SECTION 190 OF THE
BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s), & 3(2)(v-a) OF THE SC/ST (PREVENTION OF
ATROCITIES) ACT 1989, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/
accused No.4 and the learned Addl. SPP for the
respondent/ State on the appeal. Perused the relevant
materials on record.
2. This appeal is filed by the appellant/ accused
No.4 under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act [for short
‘SC/ST (PoA) Act’] praying for an order to set aside the
order dated 15.09.2026 of the learned Principal District
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
and Sessions Judge, Yadgir [for short ‘the learned
Special Judge’], by allowing the appeal and thereby to
grant bail in his favour in the case in Crime
No.226/2026 of respondent police for the offences
punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3),
115(2), 119(1), 352 and 351(2) read with Section 190 of
Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v-a) of SC/SC (PoA) Act, pending
before the learned Special Judge.
3. Notice to respondent No.2 is returned duly
served. The respondent No.2 is called out, absent and
hence, service of notice to respondent No.2 is held
sufficient.
4. The learned Addl. SPP for the respondent
No.1 has orally objected to the appeal submitting that
the there is prima facie case against the appellant for
the alleged offences. The investigation is at the initial
stage. There is specific overt-act of the appellant in the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
alleged incident and if he is granted bail, there is chance
of him tampering with witnesses and hampering further
investigation of the case. There is no special ground
made out by the appellant to grant bail and therefore,
the learned Addl. SPP has sought for dismissal of the
appeal.
5. The case alleged against the appellant along
with other accused persons is that on 16.08.2026 at
about 01.15 p.m., near Indira Canteen Cross Road in
Shahapur City, the complainant’s son and one Devaraj
belonging to SC community were walking towards
Shahapur bus-stand, where all the accused gathered
and started abusing them in filthy language in
connection with previous incident of quarrel held
between the victim and one Mallu @ Ravana, the
accused No.1. Thereafter the accused No.1 stabbed the
complainant’s son with knife over his left side of the
abdomen and also on the lower abdomen causing him
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
severe bleeding injury and he became unconscious. The
accused No.2 Raju assaulted Devaraj, who accompanied
the complainant’s son, by hitting him over his face and
jaw and other accused also joined them by kicking and
punching both the complainant’s son and Devaraj. The
appellant assaulted Devaraj with hands and also bit
him and caused injuries. The accused persons
including the appellant threatened on the life of the
injured person and also abused Devaraj, who belongs to
SC Community. Hence, the appellant along with other
accused persons committed the alleged offence.
6. The submission of the learned counsel for the
appellant is that the appellant is innocent of the
offences alleged against him and he has not committed
any offence. But, as submitted by the learned Addl.
SPP, in the complaint there is specific overt-act of the
appellant that he assaulted Devaraj with hand on his
back and also bit the right knee of Devaraj. Moreover,
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
the investigation is at the initial stage and it is yet to be
completed. Hence, at this stage there is no reason to
believe that the appellant is innocent of the offences
alleged against him.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has
produced certified copy of the FIR with complaint in
Crime No.227/2026 of the respondent No.1 Police,
wherein it is clear that on the complaint of one
Jubalappa Hadimani, a case was registered against the
complainant and other accused persons regarding the
same incident for the offences punishable under
Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2),
191(3), 351(2) and 352 of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v-a) SC/ST (PoA) Act.
8. The said case was registered regarding the
same incident, but the complaint was given in the case
on the same day between 13:15 and 13:25. This would
clearly show that the complainant herein and other
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
accused persons attempted to assault the appellant and
other accused persons. The provision of Section 190 of
BNS is also invoked.
9. However, even if it is accepted for the sake of
argument that there is case against the appellant for the
alleged offences, the said offences are not punishable
with death or life imprisonment, even though those
offences are exclusively triable by the learned Special
Judge. Moreover, even if it is accepted that there is case
against the appellant for the offence punishable under
the provisions of SC/ST (PoA) Act, the present appeal is
filed by the appellant for the regular appeal before the
trial Court. Hence, there is no reason to deny bail to the
appellant.
10. It is well settled that the bail is rule and jail is
an exception. The accused cannot be allowed to remain
in judicial custody during investigation as punishment
for the alleged offences, unless there is any special
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
ground made out by the prosecution. There is
absolutely no any serious ground made out by the
respondent Police to deny bail to the appellant. As per
the materials on record, it is clear that the appellant has
been in judicial custody from 31.08.2026 and hence, as
on this day he has been in judicial custody for more
than one month.
11. The fact that after arrest, the appellant has
been remanded to judicial custody would clearly show
that the custodial interrogation of the appellant is not at
all required by the respondent No.1 Police for further
investigation of the case. There is no material
forthcoming from the respondent Police to show any
antecedents of the appellant that he committed similar
offences or any offence earlier. Moreover, the appellant
is resident of Rakamgera, Shahapur Taluk, Yadgir
District, within the jurisdiction of the Court of the
learned Special Judge.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
12. Any of the apprehensions of the learned Addl.
SPP can be suitably met with by imposing proper and
necessary conditions on the appellant making him to
assist the Investigating Officer in further investigation of
the case. There is no any special ground made out by
the respondent Police to deny the bail to the appellant.
Therefore, the impugned order of learned Special Judge
is liable to be set aside and consequently, this appeal
deserves to be allowed
13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
allowed
i) The appeal is hereby .
ii) The impugned order dated
15.09.2026 of the learned Special Judge
in Crime No.226/2026 is hereby set
aside.
iii) Consequently, the appellant/
accused No.4 shall be enlarged on bail in
the case in Crime No.226/2026 of the
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
respondent Police for the offences
punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2),
191(3), 115(2), 119(1), 352 and 351(2)
read with Section 190 of BNS and
Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v-a) of
SC/SC (PoA) Act on his executing
personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- with two
sureties for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the learned Special Judge,
subject to the following conditions that:
a) The appellant shall appear before
the Investigating Officer as and
when required and he shall assist
the Investigating Officer in further
investigation of the case.
b) He shall appear before the learned
Special Judge/ trial Court as and
when directed and he shall assist
the trial Court in trial of the case.
c) He shall not tamper with
prosecution witnesses and hamper
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11381
CRL.A No. 200315 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030105862026
further investigation of the case in
any manner, and
d) He shall not commit similar
offences or any offence during the
pendency of case.
If the appellant violates any of the conditions of
bail, the bail granted in his favour shall stand cancelled.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
SBS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4