Smt. Reshma W/O. Mohana Pammar vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 6065 Kant

                            1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 14 T H DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
                         BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

           CRIMINAL APPEAL No.100346/2021


   BETWEEN:

   SMT. RESHMA W/ O. MOHANA PAMMAR
   AGE 22 YEARS , OCC HOUSEHOLD WORK
   R/O. MAULI APART MENT
   VINAYAK COLONY,
   SHAHU NA GAR, BELAGAVI

                                          ...A PPELLANT

   (BY SRI. VIDYASHANKAR G. DALWAI , ADV OCATE)


   AND:

   1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
   THROUGH PSI TILAKWADI PS
   REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
   BELAGAVI

   2 . ANJA LI D/ O.MA HADEV PAMMAR
   AGE 27 YEARS , OCC ADVOCATE
   R/O H.NO. 1361, LAST STOP,
   SHAHU NA GAR BELAGAVI 590010
                                     ... RES PONDENTS
   (BY SRI. RAMESH B.CHI GARI, HCGP FOR R1.
   R2 S ERVED .)

        THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SECTION
   14(A)( 2) OF SC A ND ST (POA) ACT, 1989, SEEKING T O
   ALLOW THE A PPLI CATION FOR ANTI CIPATORY BAIL T O
                                 2




THE PETITION ER AND SHE MAY BE ORDERED T O BE
ENLARGED ON AN TICIPATORY BAI L IN THE EV ENT OF
HER ARREST OR DETENTION BY THE POLICE I N
CONNECTI ON WITH TILAKWADI P.S . CRIME NO.
78/ 2021 PENDING ON FILE OF THE COURT OF III
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGA VI
FOR OFFEN CE PUNISHABLE U/S 323, 324, 504 AND
506 OF I PC.AND SECTION 3( i)(r) , 3( i)(s) OF SC AN D
ST (POA) ACT , 2014.

     THIS CRIMINAL A PPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, T HE COURT DELIVERED THE F OLLOWING:


                         JUDGMENT

The sole accused has filed this appeal

seeking setting aside of the order dated

26.10.2021 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous

No.1026/2021 by the learned III Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, wherein

the anticipatory bail petition of the appellant

sought in Tilakwadi Police Station Crime

No.78/2021 for offences under Sections 323,

324, 504 and 506 of The Indian Penal Code

(hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for

brevity) and Section 3(1)(r) & (s) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities), Act (hereinafter

referred to as the 'SC & ST Act', for short),

came to be rejected.

2. The case of the prosecution is that,

one Kumari Anjali has filed the complaint

stating that she is an advocate by profession

practicing as a junior of Sri. S.G. Kakatkar,

advocate and she goes to her senior's office at

Jakkeri Honda at around 7:30p.m. everyday.

The appellant/accused is the sister-in-law of

the complainant and she was a muslim and

she got married the complainant's brother

Mohan. The appellant used to always quarrel

with complainant's brother Mohan and made

his life miserable and at no point of time, the

complainant and her family members interfered

in their life. It is further stated that on

12.08.2021 at around 8:30p.m., the appellant

came to her office at Jakkeri Honda and

without explaining anything, started to abuse

the complainant stating that she is a lower

caste and abused her in filthy language in the

presence of her senior advocate and clients

and other staff members and when the

complainant came out of the office, the

petitioner threw a big stone at her which hit

her back and when she tried to enter her

office, the appellant dragged her and slapped

her and pushed her towards the stair case wall

and later pulled towards the car where the

complainant got injured on her head, elbow

and back and then the appellant scratched on

the face of the complainant with her nails. The

appellant gave life threat to the complainant

and threatened to file a false case against her

family to put them behind the bars. The said

complaint came to be registered in Crime

No.78/2021 of Tilakwadi Police Station for the

offences under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506

of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)&(s) of SC & ST Act.

The appellant, who is shown as the accused in

the FIR, apprehending her arrest, has filed

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1026/2021 seeking

anticipatory bail and the same came to be

rejected by the learned III Additional District

and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, by order dated

26.10.2021. The appellant has challenged the

said order in the present appeal.

3. Heard the arguments of the learned

counsel appearing for the appellant and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent No.1-State.

In spite of service of notice, respondent

No.2-complainant remained absent and

unrepresented.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant

would contend that the incident had occurred

at 8:30p.m. on 12.08.2021 and the complaint

came to be filed on 13.08.2021 at 15:00 hours

and there is a delay in filing the complaint.

The complainant has filed the complaint

against the appellant, as there is a family

dispute between the appellant and her

husband. It is his further submission that, on

looking to the entire averments of the

complaint, the offence under the provisions of

SC & ST Act are not attracted. The other

offences are not punishable with death or

imprisonment for life. Without considering all

these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has

rejected the anticipatory bail petition of the

appellant which requires interference by this

Court. With this, he prayed to allow the

petition.

5. Per contra, learned High Court

Government Pleader contended that, the

complainant was insulted in public view.

Investigation is completed, charge sheet is

filed and there are eyewitnesses to the

incident. There is a prima facie case against

the appellant/accused for the offence alleged

against her. There is a bar under Section 18

and 18A(2) of SC & ST Act for entertaining the

petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The

learned Sessions Court considering all these

aspects has rightly rejected the anticipatory

bail petition of the appellant which does not

require interference by this Court. With this,

he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Having regard to the submission

made by the learned counsel for the appellant,

and the learned High Court Government

Pleader for respondent No.1-State, this Court

has gone through the FIR, complaint and the

impugned order.

7. The appellant is the wife of one

Mohan, who is the brother of the complainant.

The marriage of said Mohan and the appellant

is a love marriage. On perusal of the

averments of the complaint, accusation against

the appellant/accused is that she abused the

complainant in abusive words and stated that

she is of a lower case in the presence of her

senior advocate, colleagues and other staff.

There is no allegation of the appellant/accused

abusing the complainant touching her caste.

Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that

an offence under Section 3(1)(r) & (s) of SC &

ST Act is attracted. Therefore, the bar under

Section 18 and 18A(2) of SC & ST Act is not

attracted. The other offence alleged against

the appellant/accused are not punishable with

death or imprisonment for life. The appellant

is a woman. Without considering all these

aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has passed

the impugned order which requires interference

by this Court. The main objection of the

prosecution is that in the event of granting

anticipatory bail, the appellant is likely to

cause threat to the complainant and other

prosecution witnesses. The said objection can

be met with by imposing stringent conditions.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the

case and submission of the counsel, this Court

is of the view that there are valid grounds for

setting aside the impugned order and granting

anticipatory bail to the appellant subject to

certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed

to pass the following:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed. The impugned

order dated 26.10.2021 passed in

Crl.Misc.No.78/2021 by the learned II

Additional district and Sessions Judge,

Belagavi, is set aside. The petition of the

appellant seeking anticipatory bail stands

allowed. The appellant is directed to be

released on bail in the event of her arrest in

Crime No.78/2021 of Tilakwadi Police Station

subject to the following conditions:

i. The appellant/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

ii. The appellant/accused shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

iii. The appellant/accused shall appear before the jurisdictional Court within fifteen days from today and execute personal bond and furnish surety.

iv. The appellant/accused shall attend the Court on all the date of hearing, unless exempted, and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE km v