Karnataka High Court
Santhosh B P vs State Of Karnataka By on 25 February, 2022
Bench: K.S.Mudagal
CRL.A.No.268/2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.268/2022
BETWEEN:
1. SANTHOSH B.P.
S/O PUTTASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
OCCUPATION: PSI IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT KOTA, BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
2. RAMA DEVADIGA
S/O LATE NAGA DEVADIGA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
OCCUPATION: H.C.1876 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT BARSI COMPOUND
NEAR MASZID, KOTA
BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
3. ASHOK SHETTY
S/O BABU SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
OCCUPATION: H.C. 50 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT POLICE QUARTERS
KOTA POLICE STATION
CRL.A.No.268/2022
2
BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
4. MANJUNATHA
S/O SRINIVASA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
OCCUPATION: P.C.NO.2598 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT GILIYARU VILLAGE
KOTA POST, BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
5. JAYARAM NAIK
S/O LOKYA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
OCCUPATION: C.P.C. 2615 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT KOTA POLICE QUARTERS
KOTA, BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
6. VIKRAM
S/O LATE SHEENA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
OCCUPATION: C.P.C. 1166 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT SRI VIGNESHWAR NILAYA
VARASHI ROAD, SIDDAPURA POST
AND VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
7. GANESH NAIK
S/O MAHABLESHWAR NAIK
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
OCCUPATION: C.P.C. 1002 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT KOTA POLICE QUARTERS
KOTA BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
CRL.A.No.268/2022
3
8. DINESH
S/O LATE VITTALA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
OCCUPATION: H.C.NO.23 IN
KOTA POLICE STATION
UDUPI DISTRICT
R/AT KAMALA SADANA
POST: KOKKARNE, BRAHMAVARA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213 ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI NASIR ALI, ADVOCATE BY HP UNIQUE & CO.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
KOTA POLICE STATION
BRAMHAVARA CIRCLE
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213
(REP. BY LD STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE)
2. RAJESH
S/O GANAPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT KOTATHATTU, KOTA
UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT - 576 213
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.S. SHANKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14(A)(2) OF SCHEDULED CASTES/SCHEDULED TRIBES
(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2022 PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.507/2022 PASSED ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI
(SITTING AT KUNDAPURA) AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.214/2021 OF KOTA POLICE
CRL.A.No.268/2022
4
STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND
SECTION 3(2)(va) OF THE SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT WITH
A DIRECTION TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF
ARREST.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned HCGP submits memo with report of the I.O.
regarding service of notice on respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 served, absent.
2. Heard.
3. Aggrieved by the rejection of their anticipatory
bail petition, accused Nos.1 to 8 in Crime No.214/2021 of
Kota Police Station have preferred the above appeal.
4. Crime No.214/2021 was initially registered
against appellant Nos.1 to 4 (accused Nos.1 to 4) by their
names and other Kota Police Station staff for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section
34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of Scheduled
CRL.A.No.268/2022
Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act, 2015 (for short 'SC/ST Act') on the basis
of the complaint of respondent No.2.
5. The gist of the complaint is as follows:
That on 27.12.2021 at 8.00 p.m. on the eve of
marriage celebrations mehandi programme was going on
in the house of respondent No.2 at Chittibettu,
Brahmavara Taluk, Udupi District. At about 10.00 p.m.
when celebrations were going on with Disc Jockey music
arrangements, the accused i.e. the officials of Kota Police
Station came there and abused the complainant and
attempted to stop the celebrations. When that was
questioned, the accused abused the complainant and his
family members with reference to their caste and
assaulted them with lathi, caused them grievous injuries.
The accused took Sudarshan, Girish and Sachin to the
police station, undressed them in the police cell and
committed atrocities on them.
CRL.A.No.268/2022
6. Apprehending their arrest in the said case,
appellants filed Crl.Misc.No.507/2021 before the trial
Court. The trial Court by the impugned order rejected
their application on the ground that there are sufficient
materials to show their involvement in the crime.
7. Sri. Hashmath Pasha, learned Senior Counsel
for Sri. Nasir Ali, learned counsel for the appellants
submits that the appellants had gone to the scene of
offence on the complaint of public nuisance due to DJ
music. He further submits that the complainant parties
themselves obstructed the police from discharging their
duties and assaulted them. He further submits that
regarding the same incident, on the complaint of one
police staff, Crime No.215/2021 was registered in Kota
Police Station against complainant party. He further
submits that having regard to the aforesaid facts, the trial
Court was not justified in rejecting the bail applications.
8. Learned HCGP submits that there are sufficient
materials to show that the appellants have committed
CRL.A.No.268/2022
police atrocities. He further submits that considering that,
the trial Court has rightly rejected the bail application.
9. Admittedly, appellant Nos.1, 5 and 6 also
belong to Scheduled Caste. He further submits that the
trial Court itself in para 13 of its order states that to the
case on hand Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is applicable. Still trial
Court proceeded to reject the application on the ground
that there are sufficient materials to show the involvement
of the appellants in the case.
10. Major offences alleged against the appellants
are under Sections 324 and 506 of IPC. As per the wound
certificate, victims had suffered simple injuries.
11. Admittedly, regarding the same incident, on
the complaint of police party, Crime No.215/2021 is
registered against complainant party for the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 353
504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
CRL.A.No.268/2022
3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. Therefore, these are the case and
counter cases.
12. Who are the aggressor is to be decided on
trial. It is submitted that already first appellant is
suspended from service and the other appellants are
transferred to different police stations. Under the
circumstances, chances of they interfering in the
investigation are remote. In the light of the aforesaid facts
and circumstances, the trial Court was not justified in
rejecting the anticipatory bail petition.
Therefore, the appeal is allowed. Impugned order is
hereby set aside. The petition of the appellants for grant
of anticipatory bail is allowed. If they are arrested in
Crime No.214/2021 of Kota Police Station they shall be
released on bail, subject to the following conditions:
(i) They shall appear before I.O. within ten
days from the date of receipt of copy of this
order.
(ii) They shall execute personal bond in a sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
CRL.A.No.268/2022
Only) each and furnish one surety in the
likesum to the satisfaction of the I.O/trial
Court for their appearance before I.O/trial
Court.
(iii) They shall not tamper the prosecution
witnesses in any manner.
Sd/-
JUDGE
pgg
