Vishwanath S/O Bhimaraya Kudli ... vs The State And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 2581 Kant

                             1


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2021

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

         CRIMINAL APPEAL No.200104/2021


BETWEEN:

1.    Vishwanath S/o. Bhimaraya Kudli
      Age: 25 years, Occ: Coolie
      R/o. Katamdevarahalli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

2.    Bhagwant S/o. Mallikarjun Kudli
      Age: 33 years, Occ: Agriculturist
      R/o. Katamdevarahalli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

3.    Basaling @ Basavaraj
      S/o. Bhimaraya Kudli
      Age: 34 years, Occ: Agriculture
      R/o. Katamdevarahalli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

4.    Bhagesh S/o. Gurunath Kudli
      Age: 21 years, Occ: Agriculture
      R/o. Katamdevarahalli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

5.    Anil @ Anilkumar S/o. Ambanna Kudli
      Age: 21 years, Occ: Agriculture
      R/o. Katamdevarahalli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi
                               2


6.     Sabanna S/o. Ambanna
       Age: 22 years, Occ: Agriculture
       R/o. Katamdevarahalli
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

7.     Ranappa S/o. Sharanappa Bhajantri
       Age: 33 years, Occ: Agriculture
       Caste: S.C.(Koriya Community)
       R/o. Katamdevarahalli
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

8.     Sabanna S/o. Dyavappa Harkatti
       Age: 36 years, Occ: Coolie
       R/o. Katamdevarahalli
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

9.     Gurunath S/o. Bhimaraya Kudli
       Age: 40 years, Occ: Agriculture
       R/o. Katamdevarahalli
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi

10.    Shankar S/o. Shivaputra Harakatti
       Age: 30 years, Occ: Agriculture
       R/o. Katamdevarahalli
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi
                                             ... Appellants

(By Sri. Arunkumar Bakkappa Kinny, Advocate)


AND:

1.     The State through Madbool
       Police Station, Tq: Chittapur
       Dist: Kalaburagi
       Now represented by the Additional
       State Public Prosecutor, High Court
       of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench
                               3


2.    Parashuram S/o. Nagappa Kalanoor
      Age: 25 years, Occ: Driver
      R/o. Katamma Devar Halli
      Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi
                                              ... Respondents

(By Sri Gururaj V. Hasilkar, HCGP for R1;
    R2 served)

       This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of
SC/ST (PA) Act praying to set aside the order dated
03.06.2021 in Crl.Misc.No.753/2021 rejecting the bail
petition filed by the appellants under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. and be pleased to direct the concerned police to
enlarge the appellants on bail in Crime No.25/2021 of
Madbool P.S., Dist: Kalaburagi and in Spl.Case SC/ST
No.22/2021 pending before the II Addl. Dist. And Sessions
Judge, Kalaburagi for the offences punishable under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324,, 114, 307, 504, 506
read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in the
event of their arrest.

      This Appeal coming on for Admission this day, the
Court delivered the following:

                        JUDGMENT

The appellants have filed this appeal under Section

14A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ( for short, 'SC/ST (PA)

Act') for setting aside the order of the learned II Additional

Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl.Misc.No.753/2021,

dated 03.06.2021, whereby he has rejected anticipatory

bail petition filed by the appellants and they have sought

for admitting them on anticipatory bail.

2. The factual matrix leading to this case are that

on 19.02.2021, at about 10.00 a.m., when the

complainant was standing near Rang Mandir at Katama

Devarahalli village, accused No.1/appellant No.1 came

there and abused him in filthy language alleging that in the

Gram Panchayat election, he has canvassed on behalf of

Arunkumar and thereby his friend Mallappa lost election

and when the complainant questioned him as to why he is

abusing him, accused No.1/appellant No.1 again abused

him in filthy language and assaulted him. At that time,

other accused persons joined him and they have also

assaulted him by iron rod, sticks and by hands. In this

regard, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the

complainant, the investigating officer has registered the

crime for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,

148, 323, 324, 114, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 149

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and under

Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (PA) Act.

3. The appellants apprehending their arrest have

approached the learned Sessions judge seeking

anticipatory bail, but, the learned Sessions Judge has

rejected their anticipatory bail petition. Hence, they have

filed this appeal.

4. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for

respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 though served is

unrepresented.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants contended

that appellants are innocent and they have not committed

the offence as alleged. It is also contended that case is

registered only on political rivalry. The ingredients of

Section 307 of IPC are not at all attracted. He further

brought to the notice that the investigation has been

concluded and charge sheet has been laid down and

complainant has suffered simple injuries and considering

the allegations, the provisions of SC/ST Act are not

attracted. Hence, he would further submit that appellants

would undertake to abide by the terms and conditions

imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed for admitting

the appellants on bail by setting aside the impugned order

passed by the learned Sessions judge.

6. Per contra the learned HCGP has contended

that the appellants have abused the complainant in vulgar

language having knowledge that he is belonging to SC/ST

and hence, there is prima-facie material and as such

sought for rejection of the application.

7. Having heard the arguments and perusing the

records, it is necessary to note that in the instant case,

investigation is concluded and charge sheet has been laid.

The investigating officer has submitted the charge sheet

against the present appellants and other accused under

Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 114, 307, 504, 506

read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),

3(2)(V) of SC & ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

8. On perusal of the wound certificate, it is

evident that the complainant has suffered only simple

injuries i.e., lacerated wound over left parietal region and

he was having tenderness over the chest. Both the injuries

are simple in nature as per the medical report. If at all as

per allegations of the prosecution the appellants have

assaulted him by iron rod and hands, he would not have

suffered the said simple injuries. Apart from that, the

investigating officer has also submitted the charge sheet

under the provisions of SC/ST Act but in the entire

complaint and further statement of the complainant there

is no reference that the appellants have abused him with

reference to caste. No specific allegations have been made

and on perusal of the records, it is also evident that some

of the accused are also belonging to the SC/ST caste. In

such circumstances, there is no allegations regarding the

accused abusing or humiliating the complainant with

reference to caste. That being so question of bar under

Section 18 of the Act does not arise at all at this juncture.

The injuries suffered by the complainant is simple in

nature. There were certain political dispute between the

parties. Investigation is concluded and charge sheet has

been laid down.

9. Under these circumstances, in my considered

opinion, I do not find any impediment for admitting the

appellants on anticipatory bail. The other apprehensions

raised by the learned HCGP can be meted out by imposing

certain conditions. Hence, appeal needs to be allowed and

accordingly, I proceed to pass the following :

ORDER

The appeal is allowed.

Appellants/accused Nos.1 to 6, 8, 10 to 13 are

ordered to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of

their arrest in Crime No.25/2021 of Madbool Police Station,

Kalaburagi in Spl.Case SC/ST No.22/2021 pending on the

file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi,

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143,

147, 148, 323, 324, 114, 307, 504, 506, read with Section

149 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(V) of

SC & ST(POA) Act, 1989, on their executing a personal

bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for

the like-sum, subject to following conditions:-

i) Appellants/accused Nos.1 to 6, 8, 10 to 13 shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

ii) They shall appear before the Trial Court as and when directed and co-operate with the Trial Court in speedy disposal of the matter;

iii) They shall appear before the Court on all hearing dates without fail, except when they are specifically exempted from doing so;

iv) They shall not involve in any criminal activities;

v) They shall surrender before the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and in the event of their surrender, the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Kalaburagi is directed to enlarge them on bail as directed above;

Sd/-

JUDGE

Srt/NS