Karnataka High Court
Musthafa M A vs State Of Karnataka By on 10 February, 2022
Bench: K.S.Mudagal
CRL.A.No.74/2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.74/2022
BETWEEN:
MUSTHAFA M A
S/O ABDULLA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
RESIDENT OF MALLIKARJUNA COLONY
GARAGANDUR
SUNTICOPPA HOBLI
SOMVARPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.NAGENDRA DIKSHIT S, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
SUNTICOPPA POLICE STATION
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. SRI.SUNIL A
S/O APPU ACHARI
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
JAMBOORU GRAMA
MADAPURA POST
SOMWARPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236
CRL.A.No.74/2022
2
MOBILE NO.9741954126 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14-A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME
NO.84/2021 OF SUNTICOPPA POLICE STATION, KODAGU FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 143, 144,
147, 149, 506, 427 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s),
3(2) (v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for appellant submits memo
with copies of chargesheet.
2. Heard.
3. Aggrieved by the rejection of his anticipatory
bail petition, accused No.5 in Crime No.84/2021 of
Sunticoppa Police Station has preferred the above
appeal.
4. Crime No.84/2021 was registered by
Sunticoppa Police for the offences punishable under
CRL.A.No.74/2022
Sections 341, 143, 144, 147, 149, 506, 427 of IPC
and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s), 3(2) (V-A) of SC/ST
(POA) Act, on the basis of the complaint of the second
respondent-Sunil. After investigation, the first
respondent police have chargesheeted the appellant
and nine others for the aforesaid offences.
5. The case of the prosecution in brief is as
follows:
On 04-10-2021 at 9.00 a.m. there was a
quarrel between complainant party and the accused
party during inauguration of the main gate of
Garanagdoor village. Local people pacified both
parties and sent them back. On the same day, at
about 3.30 p.m. when the second respondent and
CW2 Akshaya were returning in the car of the second
respondent, accused blocked their way placing silver
oak wood across the road and attempted to assault
them. Accused broke the glasses of the car by stone
CRL.A.No.74/2022
and hands. Accused Nos. 8 and 10 abused CW2 with
reference to his caste.
6. Apprehending his arrest in the said case, the
appellant filed anticipatory bail petition before the trial
Court. The trial Court by the impugned order rejected
the petition on the ground that Section 18A of SC and
ST (POA) Act, bars granting anticipatory bail and
that case is still at the investigation stage.
7. Now the investigation is completed and the
chargesheet is filed. The major offence alleged
against the appellant carries imprisonment upto seven
years. In the complaint, the allegations of abusing
CW2 with reference to caste are general against all
the accused. In the chargesheet, the allegations of
caste discrimination are against accused Nos. 8 and
10 and not against the appellant. CW2 does not file
the complaint alleging caste discrimination. Though he
CRL.A.No.74/2022
said to have accompanied the complainant and though
the complaint is filed on the same day, the statement
of CW2 is allegedly recorded after one day.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prathviraj
Chauhan Vs Union of India1 and Rahna Jalal Vs State of
Kerala2 has held that if there is no prima-facie material
in proof of caste discrimination, Section 18A does not
apply.
9. Facts and circumstances discussed above indicate
that there is no prima-facie case of caste discrimination
against the appellant. Since the chargesheet is already
filed, except for trial, the detention of the accused is not
required for any other purpose. Under the said
circumstances, impugned order is unsustainable.
10. The appeal is allowed.
The impugned order is hereby set aside.
(2020) 4 SCC 727
(2021) 1 SCC 733
CRL.A.No.74/2022
The appellant is granted anticipatory bail in Crime
No.84/2021 of Sunticoppa Police Station which is now
pending in Special CC No.84/2021 on the file of I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu, Madikeri.
If he is arrested in the said case, he shall be released on
bail subject to the following conditions:
(i) Appellant shall appear before the Investigating
Officer/Trial Court within ten days from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
(ii) Appellant shall execute personal bond in a sum
of Rs.25,000/- and furnish two sureties in the
likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating
Officer/Jurisdictional Court for his appearance.
(iii) Appellant shall not tamper the prosecution
witnesses by threats, inducement or otherwise.
(iv) Appellant shall appear before the Investigating
Officer/Court as and when required.
SD/-
JUDGE
tsn*
