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
Shri Manjayya Alias Manjunath S/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969
CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100229 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100232 OF 2024
IN CRL.A.NO.100229 OF 2024:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. PANCHAKSHARI @ PANCHAYYA,
S/O CHANNABASSAYYA HIREMATH, AGE. 39 YEARS,
OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. REVADIHALA, TARIHAL,
TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD,
KARNATAKA-580026.
- APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
HUBLI RURAL POLICE STATION, DIST. DHARWAD,
R/BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH.
Digitally
signed by
2. ANASUYA MALLAPPA HARIJAN,
VINAYAKA B V
Location:
HIGH COURT
AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
VINAYAKA
BV
OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
R/AT. REVADIHALA, TQ. HUBBALLI,
BENCH
Date:
2024.05.15 DIST. DHARWAD, KARNATAKA-580026.
12:03:52
+0530
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAEREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT, 1989, SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE ACCUSED NO.1/ APPELLANT
ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY HUBLI RURAL
POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO. 0081/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 504, 506, 34 OF IPC, 1860 AND U/S
3(1)(r)(s) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, 1989, PENDING ON FILE OF 2ND
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & 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. (POA) ACT & ETC.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969
CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
IN CRL.A.NO. 100232 OF 2024:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. MANJAYYA @ MANJUNATH
S/O. SHIVARUDRAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/AT. #218/1, DYAMAVVA GUDI ONI,
REVADIHALA, TQ. HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD-580026.
- APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
HUBLI RURAL POLICE STATION, DIST. DHARWAD,
R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWD BENCH, AT. DHARWAD.
2. ANASUYA MALLAPPA HARIJAN,
AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/AT. REVADIHALA, TQ. HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD-580026.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAEREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF SC AND ST
(POA) ACT, 1989., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE ACCUSED
NO.2/APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/S 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND U/S
3(1)(r)(s) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, 1989 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
2ND ADDITIONAL 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. (POA) ACT IN HUBLI RURAL
POLICE STATION CRIME NO.0081/2024 BY IMPOSING CONDITIONS,
IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE & ETC.
THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969
CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
JUDGMENT
Criminal Appeal No. 100229/2024 is filed by the appellant/ accused no.1 seeking to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the Hubballi Rural Police Station in Crime No. 0081/2024 for the offences punishable under Section 504, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC/ST Act') pending on the file of learned 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dharwad & Special Court for trial of the offences punishable under the P.O.C.S.O. Act and S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act.
2. Criminal Appeal No. 100232/2024 is filed by the appellant/ accused no.2 seeking to enlarge him on regular bail in the aforesaid crime.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that one Smt. Anasuya Harijan had filed a complaint stating that on 17.03.2024 in the public place at Revadihal village, the appellants/accused belonging to upper caste knowing fully well that complainant and the aggrieved persons are belonging to deprived class, abused them in filthy language taking their caste name. It is -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 further case of the prosecution that a panchayat was convened on 19.03.2024 to resolve the issue between the villagers. However, the accused have justified their illegal acts resulted in filing of the complaint which was registered by the jurisdictional police in Crime No. 0081/2024. The jurisdictional police have arrested accused no.2 on 18.04.2024 and continued investigation. Accused no.1 is before this Court seeking for grant of anticipatory bail whereas the accused no.2 is seeking for regular bail.
4. Heard Sri Gourishankar Mot, learned counsel for accused and learned HCGP for respondent no.1-State. Though notice is served on the complainant in both the appeals, she remained absent.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants/ accused submits that the complainant Smt. Anasuya Harijan is a stranger to the incident and she is not the victim of the incident. Her complaint is based on the hear-say information furnished through some villagers about use of filthy language by the accused persons. It is further submitted that the complaint is filed belatedly after 14 days from the date of alleged incident. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 It is also submitted that dispute is purely a civil dispute as the accused have raised certain issues relating to allotment of sites in their village to the deprived persons and to settle private score, a false case has been filed against accused persons. Hence, he seeks to allow both the appeals by enlarging accused no.1 on anticipatory bail and accused no.2 on regular bail.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants/ accused places reliance on the judgment of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 319/2022 disposed off on 04.04.2022 wherein under similar circumstances, this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the accused.
7. Per contra, learned HCGP opposed the appeals and submits that Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 mandates that no anticipatory bail shall be granted when the offences are alleged under the provisions of the SC/ST Act. He submits that investigation is still under progress. Hence, granting of anticipatory bail or regular bail would hamper investigation. Hence, he seeks to dismiss both the appeals. -6-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
8. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and meticulously perused the material available on record.
9. On going through complaint averments it reveals that one Smt.Anasuya Mallappa Harijan filed a complaint on 01.04.2024 alleging that accused persons knowing fully well that victims belonged to deprived class, have abused them in filthy language by taking their caste name. The complaint averments also indicate that dispute is relating to allotment of sites. Admittedly, the complainant Smt.Anasuya Harijan was not present during the incident which has taken place on 17.03.204 as well as on 22.03.2024. Her complaint is based on the information furnished by someone. Hence, this Court is of the prima facie view that the averments made in the complaint are required to be established/ proved during the course of trial. The complaint averments also indicate that complaint is filed at the instance of alleged victims and it is pertaining to allotment of sites. The material available on record does not prima facie indicate the commission of offences under the provisions of 'SC/ST Act'. Hence the bar under Section 18 and 18A of the SC/ST Act has no application.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
10. It would be useful to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahna Jalal Vs. State of Kerala and another 1 wherein it has been laid down as under:
"21. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 also contains similar provisions, which exclude the application of Section 438 of CrPC. Sections 18 and 18-A provide as follows:
"18. Section 438 of the Code not to apply to persons committing an offence under the Act.-- Nothing in Section 438 of the Code shall apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act. 18-A. No enquiry or approval required.--(1) For the purposes of this Act--
(a) preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of a first information report against any person; or
(b) the investigating officer shall not require approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any person, against whom an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act has been made, and no procedure other than that provided under this Act or the Code shall apply. (2) The provisions of Section 438 of the Code shall not apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court."
22. Section 18 explicitly excludes the application of Section 438 of the CrPC in relation to any case involving the arrest of 1 (2021) 1 SCC 733 -8- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 any person on an accusation of having committed an offence under the Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 18-A specifically excludes the application of the provisions of Section 438 of the CrPC, notwithstanding any judgment, order or direction of a court.
23. The provisions of Section 18 and 18A have been interpreted by a three Judge Bench of this Court Crl.A./2020 in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India and Others (2020) 4 SCC 727 ("Chauhan"). Justice Arun Mishra speaking for himself and Justice Vineet Saran, while construing these provisions, observed that:
"11. Concerning the applicability of provisions of Section 438 CrPC, it shall not apply to the cases under the 1989 Act. However, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the 1989 Act, the bar created by Sections 18 and 18-A(i) shall not apply. We have clarified this aspect while deciding the review petitions."
24. The same view has been taken in the concurring judgment of Justice S Ravindra Bhat, in the following observations:
"32. As far as the provision of Section 18-A and anticipatory bail is concerned, the judgment of Mishra, J. has stated that in cases where no prima facie materials exist warranting arrest in a complaint, the court has the inherent power to direct a pre-arrest bail."
25. Thus, even in the context of legislation, such as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, where a bar is interposed by the provisions of Section 18 and Sub-section (2) of Section 18- A on the application of Section 438 of the CrPC, this Court has -9- NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 held that the bar will not apply where the complaint does not make out "a prima facie case" for the applicability of the provisions of the Act. A statutory exclusion of the right to access remedies for bail is construed strictly, for a purpose. Excluding access to bail as a remedy, impinges upon human liberty. Hence, the decision in Chauhan (supra) held that the exclusion will not be attracted where the complaint does not prima facie indicate a case attracting the applicability of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989."
11. Keeping in mind the enunciation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred supra and considering the averments of the complaint and also the fact that there is inordinate delay of 14 days in lodging the complaint, I am of the considered view that the material available on record including the complaint does not make out prima facie case against the accused for having committed the offences under the provisions of SC/ST Act.
12. Insofar as contention of the learned HCGP that investigation is under progress and the grant of anticipatory bail or regular bail to the accused would hamper investigation, would be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions on the accused.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024
13. Considering the material available on record, I am of the considered view that the accused have made out grounds for allowing the appeals. Hence, I pass the following ORDER Crl. A. No. 100229/2024 filed by appellant/ accused no.1 is allowed. Respondent-Police or any other Police in the State of Karnataka is directed to enlarge the appellant/accused no.1 on bail in the event of his arrest in Hubballi Rural Police Station in Crime No. 0081/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 504, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act pending on the file of learned 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dharwad & Special Court for trial of the offences punishable under the P.O.C.S.O. Act and S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act subject to the following conditions. (1) Appellant/accused no.1 shall appear before the investigating officer within 20 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute his personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer;
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 (2) Appellant/accused no.1 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation/ investigation as and when called upon, without fail;
(3) Appellant/accused no.1 shall regularly appear before the trial court without fail unless exemption is granted by the trial Court for valid reasons;
(4) Appellant/accused no.1 shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper the prosecution evidence / witnesses;
(5) Appellant/accused no.1 shall not involve in any similar matters in future;
(6) Appellant/accused no.1 shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police on third Saturday of every month between 9 am and 5 pm and mark his attendance for a period of three months or till filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier.
Crl. A. No. 100232/2024 is allowed. Appellant/ accused no.2 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Hubballi Rural Police Station in Crime No. 0081/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 504, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act pending on the file of learned
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dharwad & Special Court for trial of the offences punishable under the P.O.C.S.O. Act and S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act, subject to the following conditions.
(1) Appellant/accused no.2 is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial court;
(2) Appellant/accused no.2 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation/ investigation as and when called upon, without fail;
(3) Appellant/accused no.2 shall appear before the trial court regular without fail unless exemption is granted by the trial Court for valid reasons; (4) Appellant/accused no.2 shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper the prosecution evidence / witnesses;
(5) Appellant/accused no.2 shall not involve in any similar matters in future;
(6) Appellant/accused no.2 shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police on third Saturday of
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6969 CRL.A No. 100229 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 100232 of 2024 every month between 9 am and 5 pm and mark his attendance for a period of three months or till filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE BVV CT:BCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8