-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:31331
CRL.A No. 989 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 989 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. KARTHIK YADAV R
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
S/O SHRI. M. RAMESH
DY RFO, GUNDRE FOREST RANGE
R/AT FOREST QUARTERS
JAKKALLI VILLAGE
BEERAMBALI POST
ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI
H.D. KOTE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 114.
2. SHRI. BAHUBALI MANEPPNAVAR
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
S/O. SHRI. KALAPPA
OCCUPATION: FOREST GUARD
Digitally signed by GUNDRE FOREST RANGE
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI R/AT MANIPANAVAR RANGER
Location: HIGH
COURT OF FOREST QUARTERS
KARNATAKA
N BEGUR POST
H D KOTE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 114.
3. SHRI. RAMU
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
S/O SHRI. LAKSHMAN KAMATE
OCCUPATION: FOREST GUARD
GUNDRE FOREST RANGE
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:31331
CRL.A No. 989 of 2023
R/AT MANIPANAVAR RANGER
FOREST QUARTERS
N BEGUR POST
H D KOTE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 114.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RENUKARADHYA R.D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ANTHARASANTHE P S
SANGURU CIRCLE
REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SHRI. SATHISH
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
S/O. KARIYAPPA
HOSHALLIHADI
H D KOTE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 114.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.11.2022
PASSED BY THE VI ADDL.DISTRICT AND SPL.JUDGE MYSORE
IN CRL.MISC.NO.2196/2022 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT
POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT
OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.69/2022 REGISTERED IN
ANTARSANTE POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
448,504,506,341,342,302 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(v)
AND 3(2)(vii) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:31331
CRL.A No. 989 of 2023
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. The accused No.2, 4 and 5 have filed this appeal seeking to set aside order dated 09.11.2022 passed by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru in Crl.Misc No. 2196/2022, where under the anticipatory bail petition filed by this appellants in respect of Crime No. 69/2022, of Antharasante Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Section 448, 504, 506, 341, 342, 302 Read with section 34 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(vii) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act,1989 came to be rejected.
2. Heard, arguments of learned counsel for the appellants and learned HCGP for Respondent No.1 state, in-spite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023
3. The case of the prosecution is that: One Sathisha S/o Kariyappa has filed complaint stating that, on 10.10.2022 at 12.30 p.m., the forest officers of Gundre Zone, RFO Amritesh, D.R.F.O Kartik Yadav, the guards Anand, Bahubali, Ramu, Shekaraiah, Sadashiva, Manja, Umesh, Sanjay, Rajanayaka, Sushma, Mahadevi, Ayappa, Somashekar, Tangamani, Siddiq Pasha suddenly trespassed into the house of the complainant and ransacked articles and abused him and his younger sister and asked them to show their father and threatened them to take their life by shooting with gun and burning their house by putting petrol and went away. it is further stated that, at 2.30 p.m., accused have taken his father by assaulting him and he was not knowing for what reason he was taken.. Therefore, he did not file complaint. It is further stated that on the next day i.e on 11.10.2022 at about 6.30 p.m., his uncle Ravi and Anand, S/o Mara went there and saw deceased Kariyappa and he was subjected to ill-treatment by the forest officials and he was unable to -5- NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 walk and therefore, they did not take him and they intimated the same to the complainant. Thereafter, one Kavitha who is the relative intimated him about the death of his father. He went to the police station and he was informed that his father died in K.R Hospital, Mysuru. He filed complaint stating that the forest officials in-spite of knowing that his father is tribal have ill-treated him and committed his murder. The complaint came to be registered in Crime No. 69/2022 of Antarasante Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2) (vii) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The appellants who were arrayed as accused No.2, 4 and 5 in the FIR, apprehending their arrest filed Crl.Misc.No.2196/2022 along with other accused seeking anticipatory bail and same came to be rejected by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru by order dated 09.11.2022. The appellants have challenged the said order in the present appeal.
-6-
NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023
4. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that, the injuries noted in the postmortem report are nine injuries and they are not sufficient to cause the death of a person, there are no internal injuries. In the postmortem report it is mentioned that, there is a blockage of 80 - 90% of Coronary Artery and therefore the death might be of heart ailment. The Forest officials might have picked the deceased for making interrogation as he was involved in forest offences, there is no allegation in the complaint that the deceased was assaulted by the Forest officials on the ground that, he belongs to SC/ST. Therefore, there is no prima facie case to attract offence under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(vii) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 and hence the bar contended in 18 and 18(A) of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act is not attracted. It is further submission that, the appellants are ready to co-operate with the investigation. The appellants being the forest officials can be secured easily. Without considering all these aspects -7- NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 the Learned Sessions Judge as passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court.
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and HCGP, this court has gone through the impugned order, FIR, complaint and other investigation papers in Crime No 69/2022.
6. The deceased Kariyappa was one of the accused in FOC 3/2022-23 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 9, 27, 31, 39, 44, 49(B), 51(1) of Wild Life (protection) Act. In the said crime when accused No.1 and 2 were arrested, they came to know name of the deceased-Kariyappa. Therefore the Forest officials brought him for questioning. It is alleged that the Forest officials including the appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5 have assaulted the deceased and caused his death. The postmortem report of the deceased reveals that, he has sustained nine abrasions and they are noted to be anti- mortem in nature. It is also noted that, the said abrasions are covered with reddish brown scab. The Doctor who -8- NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 conducted the examination over the dead body of the deceased has kept his opinion pending for want of chemical analysis and HPE report. It is also noted in the post mortem report that there is blockage to the extent of 80-90% of the right artery and 20-30% left artery. What is the actual cause for the death of deceased can be ascertained only after final opinion is given by the doctor after receipt of chemical analysis and HPE report.
7. It is not the case of the complainant that the deceased was secured by the forest officials as he belongs to SC/ST, but the forest officials secured the deceased for interrogation. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that there is prima facie case made out against the appellants for the offence under sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(vii) of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. Therefore, the bar contained under section 18 and 18-A of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act is not attracted. The appellants/accused No.2, 4 and 5 have undertaken to cooperate with the police in the investigation and the -9- NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 appellants are working as DRFO and forest guards and they may be secured for investigation. Without considering all these aspects, learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference of this court.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of learned counsel for parties, there are valid grounds for setting aside impugned order and granting anticipatory bail to the appellants/accused No.2, 4 and 5. In the result be following:
ORDER Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 09.11.2022 passed by by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru in Crl. Misc No.2196/2022 is set aside so for as these appellants are concerned. Consequential the appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5 are granted anticipatory bail and they are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.69/2022 of Antarasante Police Station, subject to the following conditions:
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 1. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5 shall execute a personal bonds for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.2. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5
shall voluntarily surrender before the investigating officer within 15 days from this date and execute bail bonds and furnish surety.
3. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5
shall remain present before the jurisdictional police station on every Sunday between 10.00 A.M., to 2.00 P.M., and mark their presence for a period of two months or till filing of the final report which ever is earlier.
4. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5 shall co-operate with investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required.
5. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:31331 CRL.A No. 989 of 2023 witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to the police officer.
6. The appellants/Accused No.2, 4 and 5
shall not obstruct or not hamper the investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.
Sd/-
JUDGE PNV/RMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17 CT:SNN