Karnataka High Court
Sri Suresh Babu vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 December, 2021
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1828 OF 2021
BETWEEN
1. SRI. SURESH BABU
S/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
2. SRI.NAGARAJ
S/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
3. SMT.SRIDEVI
D/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
4. SRI.SUNIL
S/O LATE CHALAPATHI
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 4 ARE R/AT PATNA VILLAGE
HUTHUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 101. ... APPELLANTS
[BY SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA.M.R, ADVOCATE]
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOLAR RURAL POLICE, KOLAR
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2
2. SRI.CHINNAIAH
S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT PATNA VILLAGE
HUTHUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 101. ...RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI SHANKAR H.S., HCGP
***
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL
AND GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.460/2021 OF KOLAR
RURAL POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 323, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND
SECTION 3(1)(r) AND (s) OF SC/ST (POA) 1989 NOW
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for appellants and the
learned High Court Government Pleader.
2. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits
that respondent No.2/de-facto complainant has been served
with the notice on 15.12.2021. However, there is no
representation.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that
the first informant belong to Adi-karnataka coming under
Scheduled Caste. He is a resident of Patna village in Kolar
taluk. There was drinking water problem in his village. Since
six months, he was requesting the Panchayat Development
Officer and Panchayat members to solve the drinking water
problem faced by the villagers etc. On 18.11.2021 at about
10:30 am, the Panchayat Development Officer had visited the
village in connection with auction to be conducted for fishing
in the lake. At that time, the first informant and his wife
requested him to solve the drinking water problem in the
village. At that time, it is alleged that all the accused started
abusing the complainant and his wife in filthy language
insulting them as "F ºÉƯÉAiÀÄ eÁw £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̽UÉ vÀÄA¨Á CºÀAPÁgÀ " and
threatening them that their house will be burnt etc. Further,
they held his collar and assaulted him and caused injuries.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants has
contended that there are no specific allegations against the
accused, on the other hand the allegations are that all of
them abused the complainant in one voice using filthy
language. He contends that there is an inordinate delay in
lodging the complaint and there is a counter case registered
against the complainant and others on a complaint lodged by
appellant No.1. He submits that in the present case complaint
lodged is after due discussions and deliberations only with an
intention to deprive them from seeking anticipatory bail. He
submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the
appellants and they are ready and willing to abide by any
conditions imposed by the Court.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader has
contended that there are prima-facie allegations in the
complaint attracting the provisions of Scheduled
Castes/Scheduled Tribes Act and therefore in view of the bar
under Sections 18 and 18(A) of the Scheduled
Castes/Scheduled Tribes Act, the learned Sessions has rightly
rejected the prayer seeking anticipatory bail. He contends
that in the event of grant of relief to the appellants, there are
chances of tampering the prosecution witnesses and also not
co-operating with the investigation of the case.
6. The incident has taken place on 18.11.2021 at
about 10.30 am. The complaint is lodged on 23.11.2021 at
7:30 p.m., which is after a delay of five days. Even though it
is alleged in the complaint that the accused persons assaulted
and caused injuries, however, it is nowhere stated that
complainant has taken any treatment. In so far as the
allegation of abusing complainant and his wife in filthy
language referring to their caste is concerned, the said
allegations are made against all the appellants that all of
them abused them as "F ºÉƯÉAiÀÄ eÁw £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̽UÉ vÀÄA¨Á CºÀAPÁgÀ "
etc.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on an
un-reported Judgement of this Court in Crl.P. No. 3040/2013
disposed on 30.05.2013. The relevant portion of the said
order is extracted below:
" This statement can be attributed to one
person and not to all three at the same time.
Therefore in the absence of specific reference
of the statement or language used by any one
of the accused, the Court was not justified in
holding that all the three petitioners had used
the same language and the same sentence and
has abused the complainant. Hence the
complaint is certainly vague and could not
have been acted upon in so far as the present
petitioners are concerned. In any event, the
petitioners have made out a case for
enlargement on bail.
In so far as the bar under Section 18 is
concerned as held by the Apex Court in Vilas
Panduranga Pawar prima facie, it should be
demonstrated that an offence under the SC
and ST Act has been committed in order that
the bar under Section 18 could apply. If it is
otherwise, the general principles of grant of
anticipatory bail would come into play.
Therefore, in the present case on hand, the bar
under Section 18 would not apply in the
absence of specific allegations and a case
being made out of an offence being committed
by anyone of these petitioners or all of them
put together. Hence the petitioners are entitled
to grant of anticipatory bail."
8. Learned counsel for the appellant has also made
available a copy of the First Information Report in crime
No.460/2021 registered at Kolar rural Police Station. The said
counter case is registered on the complaint lodged by accused
No.1 against the complainant and four others for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian
Penal Code. In the above facts and circumstances, the
appellants have made out sufficient grounds to allow the
appeal. Hence the following,
ORDER
The appeal is allowed.
The Order dated 04.12.2021 passed by the II Addl.
District and Sessions Judge, Kolar in Crl. Misc. No.834/2021 is
hereby set aside.
The appellants/accused Nos.1 to 4 in crime
No.460/2021 of Kolar rural Police Station, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections and 323, 504, 506 r/w
section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r) AND (s) OF SC/ST
(POA) 1989 pending on the file of the II Addl. District and
Sessions Judge, Kolar, shall be released in the event of their
arrest, subject to following conditions:
(i) Appellants shall appear before the
investigating office within a period of
one week from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order and shall
execute a personal bond in a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand
only) each with two sureties for like-
sum.
(ii) They shall furnish their address
proof at the time of executing the
bond.
(iii) They shall co-operate with the
investigation.
(iv) They shall not influence or tamper
the prosecution witnesses.
(v) They shall regularly appear before
the trial Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GVP
