Karnataka High Court
Sri Devendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 January, 2022
Bench: K.S.Mudagal
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
1
M
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1744/2021
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.DEVENDRA
S/O NARAYANA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
2. SRI.GOUTHAM. D
S/O DEVENDRA. N
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.145, II CROSS
OPP.SKF FACTORY
VIDYANAGAR, BOMMASANDRA
BENGALURU SOUTH
BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
BENGALURU - 560 099 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.FAYAZ SAB, B.G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA S.H.O.
SURYANAGAR POLICE STATION
CANDAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 106
REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. SRI.BAJJAIAH
S/O VEERABHADRAIAH. M
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT MIG 674, 13B CROSS
22ND MAIN ROAD, KHB SURYANAGARA
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
2
M
ANEKAL TALUK
CHANDAPURA - 562 106 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHANKAR H.S., HCGP FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 06.11.2021 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN
CR.NO.152/2021, REGISTERED AS SPL.C.NO.543/2021,
REGISTERED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT SURYANAGAR POLICE
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
323,324,326,504,506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND
SECTION 3(1)(R), (S) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT BILL,
2015, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard.
2. Aggrieved by the rejection of their application
for grant of anticipatory bail, accused Nos.1 and 2 in
Crime No.152/2021 of Suryanagar police station,
Bengaluru have preferred the above appeal.
3. The appellants are being prosecuted in
Special Case No.543/2021 on the file of II Additional
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
M
District & Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru
Rural District for the offences punishable under Sections
323, 324, 326, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and
Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
("the Act" for short) on the basis of the charge sheet filed
by Suryanagar police in Crime No.152/2021 of their police
station.
4. The said case was registered against the
appellants on the basis of the complaint of respondent
No.2 Bajjaiah. The trial Court has taken cognizance of the
offences and registered the case in Special Case
No.543/2021. Since the appellants were shown as
absconding accused in the charge sheet, the trial Court
has issued non-bailable warrant against them.
5. The appellants filed petition in
Crl.Misc.No.1494/2021 for anticipatory bail. The trial
Court rejected the said petition on the ground that
Sections 18 and 18A of the Scheduled Castes and the
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
M
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act bar grant
of anticipatory bail.
6. The appellants are father and son. The
allegations against them are that there was contract
between them and the complainant for construction of
house on the site of respondent No.2. It is further alleged
that the appellants did not complete the construction
work within stipulated time and respondent No.2 tried to
get further work done through his neighbours. It is
alleged that enraged by that the appellants assaulted
CW.1 with clubs and hands, caused him grievous injuries
and abused him referring to his caste.
7. No doubt, the wound certificate shows that
CW.1 has suffered fracture. However, as per the
complaint itself, the incident took place due to
commercial dispute between the complainant and the
appellants. In the complaint, it is alleged that the
appellants and 15 other persons assaulted them and
committed caste discrimination. But the first information
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
M
report is registered and charge sheet is filed only against
the appellants.
8. There is delay in filing the complaint and
delivering the first information report to the Court. The
major offence under Section 326 of IPC is punishable with
imprisonment upto 10 years or life. Since the incident is
out of commercial dispute, prima facie Sections 18 and
18A of the Act are not applicable. This view of the Court
is supported by the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India1 and
Rahna Jalal v. State of Kerala2. Since the investigation
is already completed, except for trial, detention of the
appellants is not required for any other purpose.
Therefore the appeal is allowed.
9. The impugned order is hereby set aside. The
appellants are granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.
152/2021 of Suryanagar police station which is pending in
Special Case No.543/2021 on the file of II Additional
(2020) 4 SCC 727
(2021) 1 SCC 733
Crl.A.No.1744/2021
M
District & Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru
Rural District.
10. If they are arrested in the said case, they
shall be released on bail subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The appellants shall appear before the
Investigating Officer within ten days from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
(ii) The appellants shall execute personal bond in
a sum of Rs.25,000/- each and furnish one
surety in the likesum to the satisfaction of the
Investigating Officer/Jurisdictional Court for
their appearance.
(iii) The appellants shall not tamper the
prosecution witnesses by threats, inducement
or otherwise.
(iv) The appellants shall appear before the
Investigating Officer/Court as and when
required.
(v) Till completion of the trial, the appellants shall
not visit the scene of offence.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KSR
