IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1363 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2))

BETWEEN:

SRI. BAGVANTHA RAY

BASAVANTHA RAY BIRADAR,

S/O LATE BASAVANTHA RAY BIRADHARA,

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

R/O MANNAPURA VILLAGE,

SINDAGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT

PRESENTLY WORKING AT,

CPC 823, AT AMRUTHRU POLICE AND R/AT AMRUTHRU POLICE QUARTERS,

AMRUTHRU, KUNIGAL TALUK,

TUMAKURU – 572 130.

… APPELLANT

Digitally signed

by SAMREEN (BY SRI. DAYANAND HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

AYUB

DESHNUR

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD AND:

BENCH

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY AMRUTHUR POLICE STATION,

REP. BY THE SPP,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. KUM. SHASHIKALA

D/O YAMANAPPA,

WOMEN POLICE CONSTABLE,

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

R/AT NO.30, ANNORA GOWRAMMA CAMP, GANGAVATHI KOPPALA DIST., PRESENTLY RESIDING AT AMRUTHRU POLICE QUARTERS, KUNIGAL, TUMAKURU – 572 130.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

14(A)(2) OF SC/ST(POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN CRL.MISC.761/2025 DATED 09.06.2025 GRANT BAIL TO THE APPELLANT IN CR.NO.81/2025 REGISTERED BY THE AMRUTHUR POLICE STATION KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT, PENDING BEFORE THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 318(2), 352, 115(2), 54, 74 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(R), (S), 3(1), (W) (I) AND 3(2)(VA) OF THE SCHEDULED CAST AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT 1989 IMPOSING ANY CONDITION/S AS THE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ABOVE CASE.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 26.09.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is filed by the appellant who is the sole accused in Crime No.81/2025 of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 352, 115(2), 351(2), 54, 74 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS 2023’) and under Sections 3(1),(r)(s), 3(1),(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Amendment Act, 2015 (for short ‘SC/ST (POA) Act’) and seeking to set aside the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Crl.Mis.No.761/2025 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Tumakuru.

Brief facts of the case:

2. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 14.02.2023, the appellant had visited her official residence near Amruthur Police Station. The appellant had expressed his desire to marry the complainant. Thereafter, he married her in the presence of the photo of Lord Sai Baba and asked her to keep the matter secret until the dispute is resolved. Following the said marriage, he continued their physical relationship assuring that he would inform others about their marriage. He avoided her to wear mangalsutra stating that it creates a problem to both of them.

3. It is stated that, after sometime, he refused to marry her by stating that she belongs to schedule caste and he belongs to different caste. Thereafter, he assaulted her for having demanded him that he should accept her as his wife. Therefore, she constrained to lodge a complaint against him. The respondent police registered a case in Crime No.81/2025 for the offences stated supra.

4. Heard Sri.Dayanand Hiremath, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.

5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has not committed any offences. In fact, he has been falsely implicated in the case. Both the victim and the appellant were working together. She proposed him for marriage. When he refused to marry her, she filed a false case making certain allegations.

There is no evidence to demonstrate that he had married her and committed sexual assault on her. There