Rathna Kumar C G vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 2269 Kant

                            1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 569 OF 2021

BETWEEN:
Rathna Kumar C.G
S/o. Late. Gopal C.K
Aged about 62 years
Residing at No.205/605
1st Cross, Vidhyanagar
Bommasandra
Bengaluru - 560 099.
                                           ...Appellant

(By Sri. Girish J.T. - Advocate for
    Sri. K.T. Seshagiri - Advocate)

AND:

1.     State of Karnataka
       By Hebbagodi P.S
       Rep. by Special Public Prosecutor
       High Court Complex
       Bengaluru - 560 001.

2.     Murugesh .M
       S/o Late Muthappa
       Aged about 49 years
       Residing at Hebbagodi Village
                                2



     Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk
     Bengaluru District - 562107.
                                               ...Respondents

(By Sri. Thejesh P, HCGP for R-1
    R-2 Served)

      This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A)
of SC-ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amended Act, 2015
praying to, direct the respondent police to release the
appellant on bail in the event of his arrest in Spl.C.C.
No.504/2020 (is arising out of Crime No.94/2020) of
Hebbagodi P.S. for the alleged offence punishable under
Sections 341 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) &
3(1)(s) of the SC and ST (Prevention o Atrocities) Act,
1989 and set aside the order dated 20.03.2021 in
Crl.Misc.443/2021 on the file of the II-Addl. District and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru.

      This Criminal Appeal coming on for Admission
through video conferencing this day, the Court delivered
the following:

                    JUDGMENT

In this appeal the impugned ORDER passed by

the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru

Rural District at Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.443/2021

dated 20.03.2021 has been challenged by urging

various grounds relating to the case in Crime

No.94/2020 of Hebbagodi Police Station for the offence

punishable under Sections 341 and 506 of IPC beside

Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989.

2. Heard Sri Girish.J.T., learned counsel for the

appellant who is appearing through video conferencing

and so also, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 who is

present before the Court physically. Learned HCGP has

to take care of the complainant in Crime No.94/2020

which crime came to be registered by the complainant -

M. Murugesh and also being the victim in the said

incident.

3. It is relevant to refer the provision of Section

18 and 18(A) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 which reads as under:

18. Section 438 of the Code not to apply to

persons committing an offence under the

Act.--Nothing in section 438 of the Code shall

apply in relation to any case involving the

arrest of any person on an accusation of having

committed an offence under this Act.

18(A). No enquiry or approval required.--(1) For the

purposes of this Act,--(a) preliminary enquiry

shall not be required for registration of a

First Information Report against any person; or

(b) the investigating officer shall not require

approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any

person, against whom an accusation of

having committed an offence under this Act

has been made and no procedure other than

that provided under this Act or the Code shall

apply. (2) The provisions of section 438

of the Code shall not apply to a case

under this Act, not withstanding any judgment

or order or direction of any Court.

4. According to Section 18(A) of the said Act,

there shall be expressive bar for entertaining the

petition notwithstanding anything in the Code of

Criminal Procedure or even any judgment or any order

passed by any court of law. When there is an

expressive bar under the aforesaid Section, entertaining

the petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking

anticipatory bail does not arise. However, the Court

below in Crl.Misc.No.443/2021 by keeping in view the

scope and object of Section 18(A) of the aforesaid special

enactment, the bail petition filed by the

appellant/accused came to be dismissed by assigning

reasons. Therefore, in this appeal it does not require

any detailed discussion as there shall be an expressive

bar to entertain the bail petition under Section 438

Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail as sought for.

Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to state that this

appeal does not survive for consideration.

5. In this matter, it is relevant to refer that in

pursuance of the complaint filed by the complainant,

the crime came to be registered in Crime No.94/2020

for the offence punishable under Section 341 and 506 of

IPC and so also, relevant provision of SC/ST (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Whereas in the aforesaid

substances in the FIR as well in the complaint it is

indicated that the accused said to have abused the

complainant by holding the caste name which had

wounded his feelings. Therefore, the complaint came to

be filed before the Hebbagodi Police Station against the

accused. However, the aforesaid offence lugged against

the accused are trivial in nature. Therefore, it is said

that without expressing any opinion regarding the

allegations made against the accused, though the case

in Spl.C.C.No.504/2020 arising out of Crime

No.94/2020 registered by the Hebbagodi Police which is

pending, but the investigating agency are about to

tracing of the accused in the aforesaid special case to

proceed further in accordance with law, causing for

apprehension of the accused.

6. Keeping in view Article 21 of the Constitution of

India that is Protection of Life and Liberty which is

enshrined in the said Article. Therefore, in the peculiar

given facts and circumstances of the case as well as

involvement of the accused in the aforesaid offences in

Crime No.94/2020, it is deemed appropriate to state

that the accused/appellant is directed to surrender

before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru Rural district at Bengaluru, forthwith, and

he shall file a regular bail application as contemplated

under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail.

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid reasons and

findings, I have to proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The appeal filed by the appellant/accused under

Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)

Amended Act, 2015 is hereby dismissed.

Consequently, the impugned order passed by the

Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru in

Crl.Misc.No.443/2021 dated 20.03.2021 is hereby

confirmed.

However, in a peculiar given facts and

circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to

observe that the investigating agency i.e., the Hebbagodi

Police as where the case in Crime No.94/2020 is

registered relating to Spl.C.C.No.504/2020, shall not

precipitate the matter till disposal of the bail petition to

be filed by the appellant/accused under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. by the trial Court as where the

Spl.C.C.No.504/2020 is pending.

Soon after filing of the bail petition, the trial Court

shall dispose of the bail petition on merits, on the same

day without getting influenced by any of the

observations made in this order.

Learned Spl.Public Prosecutor, in the trial Court is

at liberty to file objections, if any, to the bail petition to

be filed by the appellant/accused seeking regular bail.

However, the trial court shall dispose of the bail petition

on the same day on merits in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DKB