Bail is a rule and rejection is an exception, and the decision to grant bail in non-bailable offenses should consider the nature of the offense, character of the accused, and the likelihood of the accused being present at trial, among other factors.

JUDGMENT

P.N. Desai, J. - This appeal is filed under section 14-a(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 ('SC-ST act' for short), seeking to enlarge the appellant on bail, who is arraigned as accused No.8 in Crime No.7/2018, registered in Keshvapura PS for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120(B), 109, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 and under Sections 25(1)(a) of the Indian arms act.

2. Brief case of the prosecution is that a case came to be registered in Crime No.7/2018, on the basis of complaint lodged by one Sankeert Pillai of Hubballi on 26.1.2018. It is alleged in the complaint that on 25.1.2018 at about 8:50 p.m, the complainant who is informant received a phone call from one Smt.Presilla Laydu, alleging that his father was assaulted and attacked by some people near Vasant Nagar and asked the complainant to come to the spot. It is further informed that he came to know some four people came in a white Indica Car and attacked the father of complainant with Talwar and knives. Then the complainant rushed to the spot. There the police and ambulance was present and he found his father had sustained injuries. He also found that his father's vehicle was damaged and dashed from behind. It is further alleged that two years prior i.e., on 06.04.2016 the complainant brother by name Vinayak Pillai was allegedly murdered by one Gurappa Chalawadi and his sons namely Santosh and Satish, who are accused Nos.8 and 9 along with his henchmen by causing road accident by giving supari. The father of the complainant, who is deceased was successful instrumental in accused Nos.8 and 9 and others, not getting the bail in the year 2016. So, the accused persons had developed enmity against the deceased. They hatched a plan to kill the deceased by taking help of accused Nos.1 to 4, who are co-prisoners in Ballari central jail. This appellant was arrested on 10.4.2016, and he was taken on body warrant on 13.3.2018, since then he is in judicial custody. The police after completion of investigation have filed charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences.

3. Heard Shri Ravi B.Naik, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Smt Girija Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -State.

4. Learned Senior counsel argued that this Court already granted bail to accused No.9 namely Satish in criminal appeal No.100469/2021, vide order dated 07.2.2022. There is no allegation that he has violated any conditions. accused Nos.10 and 11 are granted bail. It is the allegation against this appellant that he made a plan to kill the deceased by taking help of accused Nos.1 to 4, who are co-prisoners in Ballari central jail. It is alleged that this appellant and his brother using the mobile phone and talking with each other. The statement of accused shows that jammers are installed in jail and there is no mobile network in the prison. It is stated by CW.46 that he did not find any mobile phone with appellant and there are no records to show the mobile number or SIM card of the appellant. Nothing has been recovered. In fact, in Special S.C/ST Case No.25/2016 on the file of learned II additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Dharwad, this appellant was acquitted along with other accused persons by judgment dated 28.10.2021. The appellant was in jail throughout the trial. It is very hard to believe the involvement in the alleged murder of Kumareshwar Pillai. Learned counsel further argued that only on the basis of voluntary statement of accused No.1, this appellant is implicated. No incriminating materials have been seized from this accused. The charge sheet does not indicate involvement of this appellant. The appellant is a family man having minor daughters. The appellant is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by t