THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 21(4) NIA PRAYING TO: (A) CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS IN SPL.C.NO.141.2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE-CUM-SPECIAL COURT FOR NIA CASES, BENGALURU; (B) ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.02.2026 PASSED BY THE LXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES), (CCH-50) AT BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.141/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.21 ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.141/2021 PENDING IN THE COURT OF XLIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES), (CCH-50) AT BENGALURU FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 143, 145, 147, 188, 353 AND 427 READ WITH SECTIONS 34 AND 149 OF THE IPC, SECTIONS 16, 18 AND 20 OF THE UAP ACT, 1967, AND SECTION 2 OF THE PREVENTION OF DESTRUCTION AND LOSS OF PROPERTY ACT, 1981.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

Appellant/accused No.21 on the file of the Court of XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for NIA cases) (CCH-50) at Bengaluru in Spl.C.No.141/2021, is before this Court in this appeal preferred under Section 21 (4) of the NIA Act, 2008, seeking to set aside the order dated 16.02.2026 passed by the Special Court and consequently to enlarge him on bail.

2. Vide impugned common order, the Special Court has rejected the bail application filed by appellant/accused No.21 and other accused.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the material available on record.

4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has filed statement of objections.

5. It is the case of prosecution that on 11.08.2020 at around 08.45 p.m., a group of 25 to 30 people gathered in front of Kadugondanahalli Police Station and started shouting slogans demanding arrest of one Naveen on the ground that he had posted certain derogatory remarks on Facebook against the Prophet Mohammed. A group of people under the leadership of accused No.14 and others entered the Police Station demanding registration of a case against him and said mob agitated in front of the Police Station and became violent and intensified their protest by shouting slogans against the police. They started pelting stones and attacked the police with wooden sticks, iron rods etc., and set ablaze vehicles etc. Initially, the case was registered in Crime No.229/2020 at K.G.Halli Police Station and later the NIA took over investigation and filed final report for the offences under Section 120B, 143, 145, 147, 188, 353, 427 r/w Section 34 and 149 IPC and Section 16, 18 and 20 of UA (P) Act and Section 2 of Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981.

6. The Special Court vide impugned order has rejected the prayer seeking bail, on the ground that it has already rejected the bail applications of the accused holding that there are sufficient material on record and reasonable grounds to believe that the accusation made against the accused is prima facie true. Further, even this Court has refused to grant bail to the accused persons and the Apex Court has also dismissed their bail applications, confirming the order passed by this Court. Bail is rejected even on the ground of restriction under Section 43D (5) of UA (P) Act.

7. The Learned counsel for appellant submits that this Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court has subsequently granted bail to the co-accused, who are similarly placed as the appellant herein and therefore on the ground of parity, the appellant is also entitled for bail. The learned counsel has made available the copies of the order passed by the Apex Court as well as this Court granting bail to similarly placed accused.

8. Learned Special Public Prosecutor contended that the appellant herein along wi