Sri Devaraj vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 8005 Kant

                               1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.866/2022
BETWEEN

1.    SRI. DEVARAJ,
      S/O. SRINIVAS @ SEENAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

2.    SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHI @ CHALAPATHI,
      S/O. SRINIVAS @ SEENAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

3.    SRI. P.R. NANDISH BABU @ NANDISH,
      S/O. RAMAKRISHNAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

4.    SRI. PAPAIAH,
      S/O. VENKATESHAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

ALL ARE R/AT PUNYAHALLI VILLAGE,
HEBBANI HOBLI,
MULABAGAL TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT.                              ... APPELLANTS

[BY SRI. SRINATH B.V., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI NANJUNDA GOWDA M.R., ADVOCATE]

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY NANGLI POLICE,
      REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
      BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.    SRI. SHANKARAPPA P.M.,
      S/O. MUNEPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
                             2




     R/AT PUNYAHALLI VILLAGE,
     HEBBANI HOBLI, MULABAGAL TALUK,
     KOLAR DISTRICT.                      ... RESPONDENTS

[BY SRI. KRISHNAKUMAR K.K., HCGP;
 R.2 SERVED]

                           ***

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2)
OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
13.04.2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.254/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR AND ALLOW
THE APPEAL AND GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.37/2022 OF NANGLI
POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF
IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, NOW PENDING
ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, KOLAR, KOLAR DISTRICT.

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                      JUDGMENT

praying to set aside the order dated 13.04.2022 passed

by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar in

Crl.Misc.No.254/2022, whereby, their petition filed under

Section 438 of Cr.P.C., was rejected.

2. Heard the learned counsel for appellants,

learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent/State and perused the material on record.

3. Respondent No.2/defacto complainant has

been served but there is no representation.

4. On the basis of a complaint lodged by

respondent No.2 a case was registered against the

appellants/accused Nos.1 to 4 in Cr.No.37/2022 of

Nangli Police Station for offences punishable under

Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC and

Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

5. Apprehending their arrest the appellants

approached the learned Sessions Court under Section

438 of Cr.P.C. The said petition was dismissed vide

impugned judgment, hence this appeal.

6. It is averred in the complaint that on

15.03.2022 there was a marriage function in the village

in front of Shri. Eashwaraswamy Temple and one Varun

son of accused No.1 had taken away the bag containing

gift covers and in this connection a panchayath was held

and the matter was compromised. The complainant had

expressed that if anybody else had committed the same

act, he would not have been spared and the villagers

would have beaten him. In this background it is alleged

that, on 19.03.2022 at about 8.00 p.m. all the accused

picked a quarrel with the complainant and abused him

and assaulted with hands, sticks and stone and when his

mother intervened she was pushed by accused No.4 and

all the accused abused the complainant as 'ªÀiÁ®£À PÉÆqÀÄPÀÄ

ªÀiÁ®ªÀÄÄAqÀ'.

7. The learned High Court Government Pleader

has contended that the complainant and his mother have

taken treatment in the hospital and the wound

certificates clearly show that they have sustained

injuries. He submits that there are eye witnesses and

therefore there is a prima facie case against the

appellants. He submits that the appellants have abused

the complainant and his mother in filthy language

insulting their caste, in public view and therefore, there

is a bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989,

to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants. He therefore,

submits that no grounds are made out to set aside the

order passed by the learned Sessions Judge.

8. The incident is alleged to have taken place on

19.03.2022 at 8.00 p.m. The complaint has been lodged

after two days i.e., 21.03.2022 at 7.30 p.m. In the

complaint, it is stated that after the incident the

complainant as well as his mother took first aid

treatment at Government Hospital, Nangli and thereafter

they went to Government hospital, Mulbagal and took

treatment. It is further stated that since the villagers

had advised that they will settle the matter and since no

settlement was taken place, complaint was lodged

belatedly.

9. It is contended by the learned counsel for the

appellants that a false complaint has been lodged on

account of political vengeance and the delay has been

used for implicating the entire family members. He

contends that even if the entire allegations are accepted,

there is no prima facie case made out to attract the

provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act, since omnibus allegations

are made against the accused persons stating that they

have abused the complainant and his mother in the filthy

language referring to their caste. In support of the said

submission he placed reliance on an order passed by this

Court in Criminal Appeal No.200121/2021 disposed of on

27.07.2021.

10. A careful perusal of the complaint averments

goes to show that there is no individual allegation made

against the accused with regard to the abusive words

used insulting the caste of the complainant. On the

other hand, it is alleged that all the four accused abused

the complainant referring to his caste as 'ªÀiÁ®£À PÉÆqÀÄPÀÄ

ªÀiÁ®ªÀÄÄAqÀ'. Even otherwise, it cannot be said at this stage

that only on the ground that the complainant belongs to

scheduled caste, the offence was committed by the

accused persons.

11. Insofar as the injury sustained by the

complainant and his mother is concerned, the wound

certificates show that they sustained aberrations, which

are stated as simple injuries. Considering the entire

facts and circumstances, the relief sought by the

appellants can be granted by imposing appropriate

conditions. Hence, the following

ORDER

Appeal is allowed.

The judgment dated 13.04.2022 passed in Criminal

Misc.No.254/2020 by the Court of II District and

Sessions Judge, Kolar, is set aside.

Appellant/accused Nos.1 to 4 are ordered to be

released in the event of their arrest in Crime No.37/2022

of Nangli Police Station, subject to following conditions:

i. Appellants shall appear before the Investigation Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal

bond each in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for likesum.

 ii.   Appellants     shall   furnish     their    address
       proof         and      shall       inform         the

Court/Investigating Officer, if there is change in address.

iii. Appellants shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses/evidence and they shall not threaten or put any inducement to the complainant, either directly or indirectly.

iv. Appellants shall be available for the purpose of investigation as and when required and they shall cooperate with the investigation of the case.

v. Appellants shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail.

SD/-

JUDGE

HB/-