The Karnataka High Court allowed an appeal filed u/s 14(A)(2) of SC/ST (prevention of atrocities) act praying to allow this appeal and set aside the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the Hon’ble City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and enlarge the appellants on bail for the alleged offences p/u/s 420,447,506,149 of IPC and sec.3(1)(f),3(1)(g),3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) act.
The Court observed that a perusal of the complaint averments does not indicate that the offences alleged to have been committed by the appellants are on the ground that the complainant or his family members belong to a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe.
Brief Facts:
A crime was registered on a complaint lodged by respondent No.2, against the appellants and others, alleging offences punishable under Section 420, 447, 506 read with 149 of IPC, Section 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r) and 31(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "SC/ST POA Act"). The complainant and his family members were cultivating the said lands measuring 10 acres 38 guntas and they were also grazing cows and sheep and they were in possession of the land including the Kharab land. The allegations are that the appellants along with brokers and BBMP revenue officers have illegally trespassed into the land of the first informant and held threat and other accused persons who have purchased the sites without any revenue process have put up constructions claiming to be the owners of the sites and they have abused the complainant and others with reference to their caste etc.
Contentions of the Appellants:
The Learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that neither the informant nor any of his family members have challenged the sale even after a lapse of 20 years, but they are making illegal demands and harassing the appellants and others and with an ulterior motive they have filed a false case against the appellants and purchasers of the sites, who are more than 50 in number.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the investigation is under progress and therefore, in the event of grant of relief to the appellants, they may thwart the investigation and influence the witnesses. She has therefore sought to dismiss the appeal.
Observations of the Court:
The Court observed that a perusal of the complaint averments does not indicate that the offences alleged to have been committed by the appellants are on the ground that the complainant or his family members belong to a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe.
The Court said that in the complaint omnibus allegations are made that the accused have trespassed into the property by fraudulently acquiring the said property and then threatened the complainant and others and also abused them, referring to their caste, etc. The allegations are vague without stating as to which of the accused have abused the complainant and others and as to when they have abused them. In the facts and circumstances, the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act will not come in the way of granting the relief sought by the appellants, as there is no prima facie case made out at this stage to attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court, allowing the appeal, held that the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the City Civil and Sessions Judge is set aside.
Case Title: Chitti Babu Naidu & Anr. v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Mohammad Nawaz
Case no.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2039 OF 2023
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Siddharth B. Muchand
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. B. Lakshman
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
