Devindrappa And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 11353 Kant

                               1




            IN T HE HIG H C OU RT OF KA RNAT AKA
                    KAL AB UR AG I BE NC H

        D AT ED T HIS T HE 1 2 T H D AY OF AUG UST 2022

                           BE FORE

         TH E H ON'B LE MR. J US T IC E P .N.D ES A I

            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200149/2022

BETWEEN:

1.     DEVINDRAPPA
       S/O ANJALAPPA YADLAPUR,
       AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O KONKAL VILLAGE, TQ. GURUMATKAL
       DIST.YADGIRI

2.     ASHOK S/O DEVINDRAPPA YADLAPUR
       AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O KONKAL VILLAGE, TQ. GURUMATKAL
       DIST.YADGIRI
3.     RAMU @ RAMESH
       S/O DEVINDRAPPA YADLAPUR
       AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
       R/O KONKAL VILLAGE, TQ. GURUMATKAL
       DIST.YADGIRI
                                                ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. S.S.ASPALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       THROUGH GURUMATKAL POLICE STATION,
       REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP
       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
       KALABURAGI BENCH

2.   PADDAMMA W/O BHIMSHAPPA KORBAN
     AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O KONKAL VILLAGE, TQ. GURUMATKAL
     DIST. YADGIRI
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI SHIVAPUTRA S.UDBALKAR &
SRI PREETAM DEULGAONKAR, ADVOCATES FOR R2)
                                     2




      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14-A(2)
OF SC/ST (PA) ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY
THE APPELLANTS UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. IN CRIME
NO.105/2022 UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 354,
506, 307, 504 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTION
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v) OF SC/ ST (PA) ACT, 1989 OF
GURUMATKAL POLICE STATION PENDING BEFORE THE SESSIONS
JUDGE,   SPECIAL     COURT    AT        YADGIRI,   AND      RELEASE    THE
APPELLANTS ON BAIL.

      THIS AP PE AL C OMING ON FOR AD MIS SION T HIS
DAY , T HE C OURT D ELIVERE D THE FOLL OW I NG :


                         JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed again st the o rder passed b y

the learned Sessions J udge, Y adgir wherein th e

petition filed b y the p etitioners (ap pellan ts herein)

und er Section 439 of Cod e of Crimin al Procedu re

(he reinaf ter referred to as 'Cr. P.C.' for sho rt) in

Crime No.105/2 022 of Guru matkal Po lice Station

Yad giri distric t reg istered for the offences punishable

und er Section s 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 354, 506, 307,

504 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter

referred to as 'IPC' for short) and under Sections 3(1)(r),

3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

(hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST (PA) Act') came to be

rejected.

2. It is co ntend ed that on th e b asis of

complaint filed by one Padm amma, w ho is

respond ent No .2 , FIR came to be registered. It is

alleg ed in the complaint that the appellants ' house is

situated in fron t of th e hou se of the inform ant. The

app ellants have f ixed a w ater pip e on the wall of th e

inform ant. Inspite o f req uest mad e by the informant

to remove the said pipe, th ey have not removed th e

same. It is furth er alleged that wh en the informan t

and her husband were sitting in f ront of th eir ho use

at 8.30 p m. on 24.06.2022, all th e accused cam e

there and abused them by taking their cas te nam e

and told that th ey have fixed the w ater pipe in their

area. Stating so, they assau lted th e husband of th e

inform ant with a club on h is h ead and also on h is leg

and also assaulted th e info rman t with hand and tried

to ou trag e her modesty and pushed her. At th at

time, the neig hbou rers c ame there and p acified th e

quarrel. The ap pellan ts have threaten ed th em.

Thereafter the h usb and of th e in form ant w as sh ifted

to hospital where h e has taken treatm ent. Accused

No.1 w as arrested on 27.06.2022 and accused Nos.2

and 3 w ere arrested on 25.06.2022 and since th en,

they are in judicial custody. As their regu lar bail

petition c ame to be rejec ted by the Sessions Co urt,

this appeal is filed.

3. Heard Sri S.S. Aspalli, learned counsel for

the appellants and Sri.Gururaj V. Hasilkar, learned

Hig h Court Governm ent Plead er for the resp ondent

No.1-State and Sri Preetam Deulg aonkar, learned

counsel fo r th e respo ndent No.2.

4. Learned counsel fo r the appellants

contend ed that appellants have been falsely

imp lic ated in the matter with an intentio n to harass

them . The comp laint averments if perused , do n ot

attract th e provisions of SC/ST ( PA) Act. The injured

is already disc harg ed from th e hosp ital and th e

injuries sustain ed are simp le in natu re. Th e

app ellants are in jud icial custody fo r more th an 1½

months. Th ey are ag ricu lturist and if th ey are kep t in

judicial custody, ag ric ultural op eration would be

affect ed. On th e other h and, they are read y and

willing to ab ide by the cond itions th at would b e

imposed by this Court. Hence, he p rays to enlarg e

the appellants on b ail.

5. As against th is, learned Hig h Cou rt

Government Pleader argued that investigation is still

in p rogress. Though inj ured is d ischarged from th e

hosp ital and the inju ries sustained are s imp le in

natu re, th e app ellan ts h ave abu sed and committed

the offen ce ag ainst the persons belo nging to SC/ST

and such offence is heinous on e and the appellants

are not entitled to be enlarg ed on bail.

6. Learned counsel for resp ond ent No.2 h as

prod uced the photog raphs o f th e husb and of the

inform ant to show th at h e h as sustained bleeding

injuries and the very natu re of act itself show s that

the ap p ellants are intend ed to co mmit m urder of th e

husb and of the informant. Therefore, in view of th e

natu re of alleg ation and ingred ients of the offence as

per th e FIR, the act of the ap pellan ts is heinous on e

and con tended th at th ey are not entitled for g rant of

bail.

7. I have peru sed th e materials placed b efore

the court and also the order pas sed by th e learned

Sessions Jud ge.

8. It is not in dispute th at the app ellan ts are

in judicial custo dy from 1½ months. It is evid ent

from th e ord er s heet of the trial Court as stated by

the learn ed High Court Govern ment Plead er th at

there are two inju ries fo und on the head of th e

inform ant's husband. It is stated that they are

simple in nature. It is stated th at th is incid ent has

taken p lace d ue to non-removal of water pip e from

the w all of the informant's hou se. So it app ears that

there is no such enmity or ill-will b etween th e

app ellants and this informan t, so as to term it as an

offence which attracts the ing redients of offence

und er Sectio n 307 of IPC at th is stage. Th e weapo ns

used for commission of offence are no t deadly

weapons a nd th e wound certificate clearly sho ws

that the inju red is alread y d ischarged f rom th e

hosp ital on 08.07.2022 itself.

9. It is settled p rincip le of law that bail is a rule

and rejection is an exception. While granting or rejecting the

bail application, the Court will have to take into

consideration,

(1) the nature and seriousness of the offence;

(2) character of the accused;

(3) circumstances which are peculiar to accused;

(4) reasonable probabilities of presence of the accused not being secured at trial;

(5) reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with; and

(6) larger interest of public or the state and similar other considerations, which arise when a court is asked to admit the accused to bail in a non- bailable offence.

10. Keeping in mind the s aid pr inciple of law

and after cons idering the material p laced before the

Court, in my co nsidered view, the ap pellan ts are

entitled to be enlarg ed on bail. Appellants are th e

perm anent resid ents of the add resses mentioned in

the appeal m emorandum . The app rehension of th e

prosec ution th at the appellants m ay threaten or

tamp er with the prosecution witnesses or they m ay

not appear before th e Court can be met ed out b y

imposing reason ab le conditions . The order p assed b y

the learn ed Ses sio ns Judge need s to b e s et asid e

and appeal d eserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed

to pass the fo llowing:

ORDER

The criminal appeal is allowed.

The ord er p assed by the learned Sessio ns

Jud ge, Y adgir dated 16.0 7.2022 in Crim e

No.105/2022 is h ereby set aside.

Accused No.1-Devind rappa, S/o Anjalappa Yadlapur,

accused No .2-Ashok S/o Devind rap pa Yad lapur, and

accused No.3-Ram u @ Ramesh S/o Devind rapp a

Yad lapur are o rd ered to be enlarged on b ail in Crime

No.105/2022 of Gurumatkal Police Station, Yadgir district,

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143,

147, 148, 323, 324, 354, 506, 307, 504 read with section

149 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w),

3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (PA) Act, shall be released on bail,

subject to the following conditions:

i) The appellants shall execute self bonds for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with a surety for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Committal/Trial Court, where the case is now pending;

ii) The appellants shall appear before the Station House Officer of Gurumatkal police station on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m., and 4.00 p.m., for a period of two months or till the Charge Sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.

iii) The appellants shall not try to tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;

iv) The appellants shall furnish proof of their residential correct address to the jurisdictional Court/Investigating Officer and shall inform the jurisdictional

Court/Investigating Officer if there is any change in the address;

v) The appellants shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial/concerned Court without its prior permission;

vi) The appellants shall not involve in any criminal activities and shall not commit similar offences;

In case any of the above conditions are violated, the

prosecution is at liberty to move application for cancellation

of bail.

Sd/-

JUDG E

VN R