THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S.14 A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, 1989, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF THE SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT. AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07-03-2026 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.140/2026 BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT, HOSAPETE AND GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED-1 TO 5 IN CRIME NO.19/2026 OF ITTIGI POLICE STATION OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 118(2), 115(2), 190, 74, 352, 126(2), 351(2) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) AND 3(1)(w) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 AND ETC.

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

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This petition is filed by the accused Nos.1 to 5 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C. & Sections 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989), praying to grant anticipatory bail with the following prayer:

“A. Allow the Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and set aside the order dated 07-03-2026 passed in Crl.Misc.No.140/2026 by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Vijayanagara District, Hosapete.

B. Grant anticipatory bail to the appellants/Accused-1 to 5 in Crime No.19/2026 of Ittigi Police Station offences punishable under section 118(2), 115(2), 190, 74, 352, 126(2), 351(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v a) and 3(1)(w) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

C. Pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. It is the brief case of prosecution that the complainant belongs to member of scheduled caste and schedule tribes and on 16.02.2026 at 09.00 a.m. when the complainant was at Sogi Village bus stand and his brother Haalesh was in the circle, at that time all the petitioners/accused have told the Santhosh that his elder brother Jagadeesh, who is the complainant is making false allegation and at that time the complainant approached the petitioners and asked the petitioners. At that moment, the petitioners abused him in filthy language by taking caste name, humiliated and assaulted. Thus, with this allegation the complainant lodged the complaint and offences as above stated, are foisted.

3. Heard Sri.Rohit Patil, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Shrikant T. Patil for the appellants, Sri.Jayram Siddi, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1/State and Sri.Santhosh Birangi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 4. Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 are served and unrepresented.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner that the complaint is emerged in the context of civil dispute and the property matters and before that a complaint is filed, which ended in filing B report. Therefore, the complaint lodged is false one. Hence, prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned HCGP and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submitted that the complaint discloses that the offences alleged have been committed by the petitioners. Therefore, the petition is not maintainable as per Section 18 and 18A of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST (POA) Act’). Further submitted that there are eye witnesses to the incident and when a concrete accusation is found out on bare reading of the complaint, then the petition filed for bail is not maintainable. He places reliance on the judgment of this Court in SHAJAN SKARIA v. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER¹2024 SCC ONLINE SC 2249.

6. Upon considering the materials available at this stage, the provocation alleged in the complaint is that the petitioners have called upon the brother of the complainant and abused him in abusive words with regard to cast