As per case facts, the appellant/accused No.6, Naveen Kumar, appealed against the rejection of his bail application in Special C.C No.2147/2025. He was arrested during the investigation and remanded to ... judicial custody in a case registered against him and his associates for offenses under various Acts, including SC/ST (POA) Act, Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, Arms Act, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and Karnataka Control of Organized Crime Act. The charges relate to an organized crime involving a rejected love affair, where the accused allegedly damaged property, assaulted a person with deadly weapons, and committed criminal mischief. The appellant was implicated based on the voluntary statement of a co-accused and identified by eye-witnesses and CCTV footage. He also has a criminal antecedent of five cases. The appellant filed an appeal against the rejection of his successive bail application by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arguing that there were no materials to constitute the offense under KCOCA Act and that he belongs to a Scheduled Caste, making SC/ST (POA) Act provisions inapplicable to him. The complainant also stated no objection to granting bail. The question arose whether there were sufficient grounds to interfere with the trial court's impugned order rejecting bail, especially considering the filing of the charge sheet as a changed circumstance. Finally, the High Court found no legal or factual error in the impugned order, observing that prima facie materials indicated the accused's involvement, his criminal antecedents, and the absence of changed circumstances warranting bail. The appeal was dismissed.