Suresh S/O. Hulagappa Guggri vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 2178 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 10 T H DAY OF JUNE 2021
                       BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100096 OF 2021
                      C/W
        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100097 OF 2021
                      AND
        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100098 OF 2021


   IN CRIMINAL A PPEAL NO.100096 OF 2021
   BETWEEN :

   1.   SHRI TIMMANNA S/O. BUDDAPPA UPPAR,
        AGE-26 YEARS, OCC- PRIVATE EMPLOYEE,
        R/O.HITNAL, TQ & DIST- KOPPAL,
        PIN-583 231.

   2.   SHRI AVINASH KUMAR S/O.YOGENDRA SHUKLA,
        AGE- 29 YEARS, OCC- PRIVATE EMPLOYEE,
        R/O.HITNAL, TQ & DIST- KOPPAL,
        PIN-583 231.

   3.   SHRI MANJUNATH S/O.RANGAPPA BANAJIGA,
        AGE- 42 YEARS, OCC- PRIVATE EMPLOYEE,
        R/O.HITNAL, TQ & DIST- KOPPAL,
        PIN-583 231.
                                      ...APPELLANTS

        (BY SRI HEMANTH KUMAR L.HAVARAGI, ADV.)

   AND :

   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
        REPRESENTED BY ITS
                        2




     STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
     HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA,
     DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD,
     THROUGH MUNIRABAD P.S.
     DIST-KOPPAL-580001.

2.   SHRI CHIDANAND S/O RAMESH BHOVI,
     AGE-28 YEARS, OCC-GOVT. EMPLOYEE,
     R/O GANGAVATI, TQ-GANGAVATI,
     DIST KOPPAL-583231.
                                ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R-1) (R2-SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989

MAY KINDLY RELEASED ON REGULAR BAIL IN FIR (SC/ST) NO.211/2021 (MUNIRABAD P.S. CRIME NO.78/2021) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 355, 427, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRI BES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS/SPECIAL JUDGE, KOPPAL IN SO FAR AS APPELLANTS ARE CONCERNED.

IN CRIMINAL A PPEAL NO.100097 OF 2021 BETWEEN :

1. SHRI GURUSHANTAYYA S/O.GAVISIDDAYYA SHASHIMATH, AGE-23 YEARS, OCC-PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O. HOSALLI, TQ. AND DIST-KOPPAL, PIN-583 231.

2. SHRI SHARANAYYA S/O.MUDAKAYYA HIREMATH, AGE-25 YEARS, OCC-PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O. HOSALLI, TQ. AND DIST-KOPPAL, PIN-583 231.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI HEMANTH KUMAR L.HAVARAGI, ADV.)

AND :

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD, THROUGH MUNIRABAD P.S. DIST-KOPPAL-580001.

2. SHRI CHIDANAND S/O RAMESH BHOVI, AGE-28 YEARS, OCC-GOVT. EMPLOYEE, R/O GANGAVATI, TQ-GANGAVATI, DIST KOPPAL-583231.

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R-1) (R2-SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 AND PRAYED THAT ACCUSED NOS.11 AND 12 MAY KINDLY RELEASED ON REGULAR BAIL IN FIR (SC/ST) NO.211/2021 (MUNIRABAD P.S.CRIME NO.78/2021) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 355, 427, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED PRL.

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS/SPECIAL JUDGE, KOPPAL IN SO FAR AS APPELLANTS ARE CONCERNED.

IN CRIMINAL A PPEAL NO.100098 OF 2021 BETWEEN :

SURESH S/O.HULAGAPPA GUGGRI, AGED 25 YEARS, OCC-PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O.HITNAL, TQ. AND DIST-KOPPAL, PIN-583 231.

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI HEMANTH KUMAR L.HAVARAGI, ADV.)

AND :

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD, THROUGH MUNIRABAD P.S. DIST-KOPPAL-580001.

2. SHRI CHIDANAND S/O RAMESH BHOVI, AGE-28 YEARS, OCC-GOVT. EMPLOYEE, R/O GANGAVATI, TQ-GANGAVATI, DIST KOPPAL-583231.

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R-1) (R2-SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14A(2) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 AND PRAYED THAT ACCUSED NO.1 MAY KINDLY RELEASED ON REGULAR BAIL IN FIR (SC/ST)

NO.211/2021 (MUNIRABAD P.S.CRIME NO.78/2021) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 355, 427, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS/SPECIAL JUDGE, KOPPAL IN SO FAR AS APPELLANTS ARE CONCERNED.

THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

COMMON JUDGMENT

Criminal Appeal No.100096/2021 has been

filed by accused Nos.9, 13 and 14 challenging

the order dated 17.04.2021. Criminal Appeal

No.100097/2021 has been filed by accused

Nos.11 and 12 challenging the order dated

17.04.2021. Criminal Appeal No.100098/2021

has been filed by accused No.1 challenging the

order dated 17.04.2021. In all the three

appeals the orders under challenge are dated

17.04.2021 passed by the Principal District and

Sessions/Special Judge, Koppal rejecting the

bail applications filed by the accused Nos.1, 9,

11 to 14 of Munirabad Police Station Crime

No.78/2021 for the offences punishable under

Sections 341, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 355,

427, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC

and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled

Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to

as the 'SC/ST (POA) Act', for brevity).

2. Notice to respondent No.2 has been

served and he remained unrepresented.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for

the appellants and learned HCGP for

respondent No.1-State.

4. The case of the prosecution is that one

Chidanand S/o Ramesh Bhovi, AEE, Karnataka

Rural Drinking Water and Sanitation

Department, Sub-division, Gangavathi had filed

complaint stating that on 25.03.2021 at about

10.30 a.m. the complainant and his contractor

one-Nagaraj S/o Yallappa Chalageri, Bhovi,

along with a rented car driver one-Prashant

S/o. Laxman Bhovi went in a car bearing

No.KA-37/B-0088 to Koppal D.F.O. Office in

order to discuss about Chikkabenaskal Rajeev

Gandhi Drinking Water Scheme. While

returning, when they were near Shahapur Toll

while they were proceeding to Gangavathi at

about 4.15 p.m., the toll staff stopped the car

and asked about toll charges, for which, the

driver of the car said since it is a Government

vehicle it is exempted from paying toll charges,

but the toll staff did not agree and persistently

demanded toll charges. In this process an

altercation took place between the accused/

appellants and the complainant and eventually

it lead to assaulting and abusing the

complainant by taking his caste name and as

such he was alleged to have been humiliated in

the public and they alleged to have given

threat with dire consequences and caused

damage to their car by pelting stones. A

written complaint filed by the said Chidanand

came to be registered in Crime No.78/2021 of

Munirabad Police Station for the aforesaid

offences. The appellants were arrested on

25.03.2021 and remanded to judicial custody.

The appellants have filed bail applications and

the same was rejected by Principal District and

Sessions/Special Judge, Koppal by two

separate orders dated 17.04.2021. Aggrieved

by the said orders, the appellants are before

this Court seeking to set aside the said orders

and grant of regular bail.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants has

submitted that on perusal of the entire

complaint, no overt acts of the appellants/

accused Nos.9 and 11 to 14 have been stated.

The name of the appellants/accused Nos.9 and

11 to 14 have been mentioned only at the

instance of accused No.1-Suresh when he

revealed their names on seeing the video clips

received by one-Krishna, Police Constable

through social media. He further contended

that the appellants/accused Nos. 1, 9 and 11 to

14 are innocent and they have not committed

any offences as alleged and they have been

falsely implicated in the case. He further

contended that the offences alleged are not

punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

He further contended that the Trial Court

ignored all these aspects and therefore, the

orders passed by the Trial Court require to be

set aside. With this, he prayed to allow the

appeals.

6. Per contra, the learned HCGP submits that

investigation has been completed and charge

sheet has been filed against the appellants and

other accused for the offences stated in the

FIR. CW-4 and CW-5 are injured eyewitnesses.

CW-6 to CW-8 are eyewitnesses to the

incident. The learned HCGP has made available

the copy of the charge sheet. He further

contended that on looking into the charge

sheet materials, there is a prima facie case

against the appellants for the offences alleged

against them. If the appellants are released on

bail, they will tamper the prosecution

witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he

prayed for dismissal of the appeals.

7. Having regard to the submission made by

the learned counsel for the appellants and the

learned High Court Government Pleader. I have

carefully and cautiously perused the FIR,

complaint, impugned orders and charge sheet

papers. The complainant is a public servant.

He was passing through the toll and travelling

in a car bearing No.KA-37/B-0088. In the said

toll the appellants and other accused were

working as staff. On seeing the said

registration number, it appears that it is not a

Government car and it is a private car. On

looking to the complaint and charge sheet

papers, the main allegation is against the

accused No.1/Suresh. No overt acts have been

alleged against the appellants/accused Nos.9,

11 to 14 in the FIR and complaint. The names

of the appellants have been stated by accused

No.1-Suresh on looking to the video clip shown

by appellants, which is received by one of the

Police staff in his mobile through social media.

The appellant/accused No.1-Suresh is a toll

staff and it is not a case of the prosecution

that he is acquainted with the complainant and

he knows his caste. Whether the accused No.1

abused the complainant touching his caste is a

matter of trial. The offences alleged are not

punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

There are no criminal antecedents of the

appellants. The appellants are in judicial

custody since 25.03.2021. As charge sheet is

filed, appellants are not required for custodial

interrogation. All these aspects have not been

considered by the Trial Court while passing

impugned orders. Hence, the impugned orders

require to be set aside by allowing the appeals.

8. The main objection of the prosecution is

that if the appellants are granted bail, they will

tamper the prosecution witnesses, the said

objection may be set right by imposing some

stringent conditions.

9. 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 orders and granting

bail subject to terms and conditions. Hence, I

proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

Criminal Appeal Nos.100096, 100097 and

100098 of 2021 are allowed.

Impugned orders dated 17.04.2021 passed

by Principal District and Sessions/Special

Judge, Koppal in Crime No.78/2021 of

Munirabad Police Station are set aside.

The bail applications filed by appellants/

accused Nos.1, 9 and 11 to 14 under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. are allowed. Consequently, the

appellants/accused Nos.1, 9 and 11 to 14 shall

be released on bail in Crime No.78/2021 of

Munirabad Police Station subject to the

following conditions:

to 14 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. Due to COVID-19, the appellants are permitted to furnish surety within two months. If the circumstances arise, the jurisdictional

Court is permitted to extend the period for furnishing surety.

to 14 shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

to 14 shall appear before the Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ckk