THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989, PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER RELEASING THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN GAJENDRAGAD P.S. CRIME NO.34/2026 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 196(1)(a), 352, 353(2) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND SECTION 3(1)(t) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT-2015 BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19/06/2026 IN SPECIAL CASE NO.73/2026 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE RAJESHWARI N.HEGDE

ORAL JUDGMENT

The accused is before this Court assailing the order dated 19.06.2026, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, in Special Case No.73/2026, rejecting the bail application of the accused.

Facts of the case in brief is that, from 10.00 p.m. on 01.03.2026 to 06.00 a.m. on the next day (i.e. on 02.03.2026) the accused with an intention to cause communal disturbance, downgraded the national heroes by tying footwear on Dr.B.R.Ambedkar and Sri Babu Jagjeevanram photos in Gulaguli village. On the complaint filed by respondent No.2, a crime was registered against this accused for the offence punishable under Section 196(1)(a), 352, 353(2) of BNS and Section 3(1)(t) of SC & ST Act.

In this appeal respondent No.1 being the State, learned HCGP entered appearance and filed statement of objections. Learned HCGP submitted that, respondent No.2 is the victim he is a Police Officer and HCGP will represent respondent No.2 also.

Heard the arguments of Sri Vidyashankar Dalwai learned counsel for appellant and Sri Abhishek Malipatil learned HCGP for the respondents. Perused the material placed before the Court.

Learned counsel for appellant submitted that, this accused has been arrested by the police on 03.03.2026 and since then he has been in Judicial Custody. Further, it is also submitted that now investigation is already completed and charge sheet has been filed, which is numbered as Special Case No.73/2026. After completion of the charge sheet, this accused filed the bail application seeking his regular bail before the learned Sessions Judge. However, the learned Sessions Judge has rejected his bail application.

It is contended that, the accused has not committed any offence. He is innocent, despite of which respondent No.2 suo-moto registered FIR against this accused and as the charge sheet has already been filed, custodial interrogation of this accused may not be required. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that, he may be enlarged on bail.

On the contrary, learned HCGP submitted that this accused has committed the offence punishable under the provisions of SC & ST Act and further, he has also undermined the national heroes and caused communal disturbance in the village, in case if he is released on bail, there may be chances of committing similar offences and hence submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.

On going through the papers produced along with this appeal, the allegation against this accused is for the offence punishable under Section 196(1)(a), 352, 353(2) of BNS and under the provisions of SC & ST Act.

It is submitted that this accused has been in Judicial Custody since 03.03.2026, almost six months is lapsed and charge sheet is also filed. Further it is submitted that, there are no criminal antecedents against this accused. He is an agriculturist and earning member of the family.

On going through the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that charge sheet has already been filed and he has been in Judicial Custody for a period of six months, his custodial interrogation may not be required and as there are no criminal antecedents, this appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the appeal is deserves to be allowed.

Therefore, this Court proceeds to pass