Sri B D Niranjan vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 2352 Kant

                                        CRL.A.No.149/2022

                            1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                          BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.149/2022
BETWEEN:

SRI. B.D. NIRANJAN
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O DHARMAPPA
R/OF SHANTHALLI VILLAGE
AND POST - 571 236
SOMWARPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT                            ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI.JAGADISH BALIGA N., ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY SOMWARPET POLICE STATION
      SOMWARPET TALUK - 571 236
      KODAGU DISTRICT

      REPRESENTED BY THE
      STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
      BENGALURU - 560 001

2.    SRI. T.J. PRAVEEN
      AGED 41 YEARS
      S/O LATE JOYAPPA
      PRESS REPORTER
      PRAJASATHYA NEWSPAPER
      RTO QUARTERS, NEAR RAJA SEAT
      MADIKERI TOWN & POST - 571 236
                                           CRL.A.No.149/2022

                             2


      MADIKERI TALUK
      KODAGU DISTRICT                     ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1;
    R2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.340/2021 OF
SOMWARPET     POLICE    STATION    FOR   THE    OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 326, 504 R/W SECTION 34
OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) AND 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT, 1989 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI AND DIRECT
THE APPELLANT TO BE ENLARGED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON
HIS ARREST OR ON SURRENDER IN CRIME NO.128/2021 OF
THE SOMWARPET POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 326, 504 R/W SECTION 34
OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) AND 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT, 1989 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI.

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                      JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the rejection of his anticipatory bail

petition, accused No.1 in Crime No.128/2021 of

Somwarpet Police Station has preferred the above appeal.

2. Crime No.128/2021 was registered against the

appellant and three others on the basis of the complaint of

one Praveena T.J. for the offences punishable under CRL.A.No.149/2022

Sections 324, 326, 504 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r),

3(1)(2) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled

Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the

Act').

3. It is alleged that on 13.12.2021 at 8.45 p.m.

when the complainant had gone to Safali Bar, he found the

accused assaulting his friend Delaksha. It is further

alleged that when he went to the rescue of his friend

Delaksha, the appellant abused him in filthy language with

reference to his caste and assaulted him with an iron rod

on the back of his head. It is further alleged that other

accused assaulted him with tiles, iron rod, bricks and beer

bottle. It is further alleged that accused No.3 assaulted on

his face with brick and broke his teeth.

4. On apprehension of being arrested in the

above case, the appellant filed anticipatory bail petition

before the trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.340/2021. The trial

Court by the impugned order rejected the said petition on

the ground that Section 18A of the Act bars granting CRL.A.No.149/2022

anticipatory bail and there was prima facie material to

show the involvement of the appellant in the case.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

there is no prima facie material to show caste based

atrocity. Therefore, Section 18A of the Act is not

applicable. He further submits that injuries suffered by the

victim are simple in nature.

6. Learned HCGP submits the CD records

containing copies of the wound certificate of the victim.

7. The statement of the complainant at this stage

shows that the appellant assaulted the complainant

abusing with reference to his caste. Wound certificate of

the complainant shows that he has suffered nine injuries

out of which one was a fracture. Therefore, contention

that the injuries suffered were simple in nature cannot be

countenanced.

8. The case is still at the investigation stage. In

the light of the statement of the complainant, the trial CRL.A.No.149/2022

Court has rightly observed that prima facie case attracts

provision of Section 18A of the Act. Having regard to the

material on record and the other facts and circumstances,

it cannot be said that the trial Court committed error in

exercising its discretion to reject the anticipatory bail

petition. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

pgg