Anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act may be granted if no prima facie case is established; however, the accused's criminal history and specific role in the alleged conspiracy are critical factors in determining whether a prima facie case exists to justify the bar on pre-arrest bail.

(U/S.14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.01.2026 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, THE EXCLUSIVE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED FOR OFFENCES TRIABLE UNDER SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT AT: BELAGAVI IN CRL.MISC NO.001585/2025 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE PRESENT CRIMINAL APPEAL BY ENLARGING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.5 AND 6 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMED FIT IN GOKAK TOWN P.S. CRIME NO.166/2025, DATED 27/11/2025, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120B AND 149 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(g), 3(1) (f) OF THE SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT 2015, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY IN SO FAR AS PRESENT APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO 5 AND 6 ARE CONCERNED.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)

This criminal appeal is filed under Section 14A (2) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the SC and ST Act, 1989’), seeking to enlarge the appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 on anticipatory bail with the following prayer:

“PRAYER

Wherefore, it is most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

a) Set aside the order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, the Exclusive Special Court Constituted for offences triable under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act at Belagavi in Crl.Misc.No.001585/2025.

b) And consequently allow the present criminal appeal by enlarging the appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 on Anticipatory Bail on such terms and conditions as deemed fit in Gokak Town PS Crime No.166/2025, dated 27.11.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 120B and 149 of IPC and U/S 3(1) (g), 3(1) (f) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 in the interest of justice and equity insofar as present appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 are concerned.”

The appeal is filed seeking anticipatory bail to the appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6 in connection with the offences alleged as described above.

It is the brief case of prosecution that as per the complaint/FIR averments, the complainant belongs to a member of the Scheduled Tribe and it is stated that on 08.01.1938, four persons namely, Santavva Shetya Gudaz; Yallavva Shatya Gudaz; Ranavva D/o. Ramappa Gudaz and Santya Shatya Myageri were granted the land bearing Sy.No.387/S and accordingly their names were entered in the revenue records. Further, it is the case of prosecution that the grandmother of the complainant had obtained the land to the extent of 03 acre 29 guntas in Sy.No.387/S and was cultivating the same.

It is the case of prosecution that at a later point of time, other names have been entered in the revenue records and on 18.11.2024, the complainant has filed an application for correction of their names entered in the records in respect of the land bearing Sy.No.387/S/1, but it is noticed that accused No.1 himself impersonated and all the accused conspired to dupe the land to themselves for unlawful gain and to shield common intention, prepared/created concocted documents and by making impersonation showed that the land was sold out. Thus, deprived the right of the complainant to use the land as owner and dispossessed the complainant. For which, the allegation against the appellants/accused Nos.5 and 6, who are the bond writers and they have facilitated the other accused in these types of conveyance transactions. Therefore, the offences are registered as above stated.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that these appellants/accu