Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Karnataka High Court
Kallappa S/O Nagappa Baliger vs State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2024
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943
CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100189 OF 2024
(U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT-)
BETWEEN:
KALLAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA BALIGER,
AGE 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O MURAKATTI, TQ. DHARWAD,
PINCODE-580118.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH DHARWAD RURAL POLICE STATION,
DHARWAD, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
2. MANJULA W/O. BASAVARAJ BELUR,
AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRI.,
R/O. DEVARHUBBALLI, TQ. DHARWAD-580118.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI ...RESPONDENTS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
(BY SRI PRAVEEN Y. DEVARADDIYAVAR, HCGP FOR R1,
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A (2) OF SC AND ST
(POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
COURT OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
DHARWAD AND SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF THE OFFENCES
UNDER THE P.O.C.S.O ACT AND S.C. AND S.T (P.O.A) ACT IN
DHARWAD RURAL P.S. CRIME NO.54/2024 DATED 19.03.2024 FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.143, 147, 323, 354, 354(A), 354(B),
427, 447, 341, 504 AND 506 R/W SECTION 149 OF I.P.C AND
SECTION 3(1)(e), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943
CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024
OF S.C AND S.T (POA) ACT AND GRANT THE REGULAR BAIL TO THE
APPELLANT/ACCUSE NO.1 & ETC.,
THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned HCGP for respondent no.1.
2. This appeal is filed under Section 14(2) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'SC/ST Act'), against order dated 19.03.2024 passed by learned II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, in Dharwad Rural P.S.Crime No.54/2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 354, 354(A), 354(B), 427, 447, 341, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(e), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.
3. Appellant herein was accused no.1 in Crime no.54/2024. As per complaint was filed on 22.02.2024 at 9.10 p.m., imputations against appellant/accused no.1 were that on 22.02.2024, when complainant was in land bearing R.Sy.no.137/2 of Murakatti village, at about 12.15 p.m., accused along with his wife and others entered land on a -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943 CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024 Tractor and destroyed sugarcane and tomato crops by driving it over crops. On confronting by complainant, accused held her arm, assaulted and kicked her after uttering abuses. He pulled her saree and slapped Karemma who tried to intervene. It is alleged that accused abused complainant with words having sexual references and also threatened to kill her and that said acts were by reference to caste of complainant.
4. Sri Nagaraj C.Kolloori, learned counsel for accused submitted that accused was arrested on 05.03.2024 and was in custody. Bail petition filed by him was dismissed by trial Court on 19.03.2024. It was submitted, material requirement for constituting offences i.e., allegation that accused knowing fully well about complainant belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes had committed acts which would constitute offences under SC/ST Act, were missing. Therefore, none of offences alleged could be substantiated. Further, land bearing R.S.No.137/2 on which complainant claimed interest actually belonged to accused and was not a public place.
5. It was submitted, reason assigned by trial Court, that accused was politically influential and matter was still -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943 CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024 under investigation, would not be justified in above circumstances for rejecting bail petition. It was submitted, accused had earlier filed complainants in Dharwad Rural Police Station namely Crime no.46/2024 on 27.02.2024 and Crime no.55/2024 on 23.02.2024 against complainant's husband etc., at whose instance and as counterblast, present complaint was filed. But, said aspects were not taken note of. On above grounds, sought for allowing appeal.
6. On other hand, learned HCGP for respondent State opposed appeal. It was submitted, complaint was filed on very date of occurrence of incident, without any delay and incident occurred in presence of eyewitnesses. Further, complainant had clearly stated that there was reference to caste of complainant. Thus, ingredients for offences were present justifying rejection of bail application. It was further submitted that in case accused secured bail, there was likelihood of tampering with witnesses and investigation.
7. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned HCGP for respondent-State. It is seen that on 04.04.2024, notice to complainant was ordered and as per report dated -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943 CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024 20.04.2024, complainant was informed. Complainant has however, not appeared and opposed appeal.
8. From above, it is seen that offences alleged against appellant/accused are mainly under provisions of SC/ST Act. In order to constitute offences under said Act, material allegation about accused committing acts knowing fully well that complainant belonged to Schedule Caste or Tribes would be necessary. Whether averment that assault/abuses were with reference to accused belonging to lower caste would be sufficient would be matter of trial.
9. History of civil litigation and complaints filed by accused were not considered while rejecting bail application. None of offences alleged are punishable by death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, impugned order passed would not be sustainable and appellant-accused no.1 would be entitled for bail by imposing conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER Appeal is allowed.-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6943 CRL.A No. 100189 of 2024 Impugned order dated 19.03.2024 passed in Dharwad Rural P.S.Crime No.54/2024 by the learned II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, is set aside.
Consequently, appellant/accused no.1 is ordered to be released on bail in Dharwad Rural P.S. Crime no.54/2024, subject to following conditions:
i) Appellant-accused no.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety for likesum to satisfaction of enlarging Court.
ii) Appellant-accused no.1 shall cooperate with investigating officer in investigation and shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses.
iii) Appellant/accused no.1 shall attend Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of case.
iv) Appellant/accused no.1 shall not enter Devara Hubballi village.
Sd/-
JUDGE CKK/AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4