Karnataka High Court
Venkata Reddy vs State Of Karnataka By on 23 March, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.241 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. VENKATA REDDY
S/O LATE PATHAKOTA NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
2. POOLA NAGESH @ NAGESH
S/O VENKATARAVANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
3. THIPPANNA
S/O LATE PATHAKOTA NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
4. CHALAPATHI
S/O LATE PATHAKOTA NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
5. VENKATARERAVANA
S/O LATE PEDDA REDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
PETITIONER ALL ARE
R/AT THADIGOL VILLAGE AND POST,
RONUR HOBLI,
SRINIVASAPURA TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT
PIN-571 103.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.LAKSHMIKANTH.K, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
SRINIVASAPURA POLICE STATION
KOLAR DISTRICT.
REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE-01.
2. NARENDRA T.V.
S/O VENKATARAVANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT THADIGOL VILLAGE AND POST,
RONUR HOBLI,
SRINIVASAPURA TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT
PIN-571 103.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R.D.RENUKARADHYA-HCGP FOR R1
R2-SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 19.01.2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.16/2022 ON
THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, KOLAR AND ORDER TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTS
ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 323,
324, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT IN THEIR CR.NO.224/2021 PENDING ON
THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, KOLAR.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING;
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by accused Nos.1 to 5 in
Cr.No.224/2021 of Srinivasapura Police Station,
registered for offences punishable under Sections 143,
323, 324, 504 R/w Section 149 IPC and Section 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants
and learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent-State and perused the material on record.
3. Though the first informant/respondent No.2 is
served but there is no representation.
4. On the basis of a complaint lodged by one
Narendra.T.V, aforesaid crime was registered against
accused No.1 to 5/appellants. Apprehending their arrest,
they preferred a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C before
the Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.16/2022. The learned
Sessions Judge vide order dated 19.01.2022, rejected
the said petition observing that on a bare perusal of
complaint, it indicate that accused persons knew about
the caste of the complainant and further they have
assaulted him by knife and club and caused wounds
which can be seen from the wound certificate, indicates
the intention to insult and intimidate the complainant
and his family members and therefore, it squarely comes
within the purview of Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST
(POA) Act. It is further observed that looking to the
complaint and FIR and other materials produced before
the Court, it indicates existence of prima-facie material
and as laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, when there is
prima-facie case, bar under Section 18 and 18A of the
Act applies.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants has
contended that the entire allegations are false and on
account of political rivalry, the appellants are falsely
implicated. He submits that the allegations in the FIR are
omnibus in nature, without referring as to who abused
the complainant by referring to his caste. He submits
that the ingredients of the provisions of SC and ST Act
alleged are not made out and therefore the learned
Sessions Judge was not proper in rejecting the petition
seeking anticipatory bail on the ground that there is bar
U/Section 18 and 18A of the Act. Further contends that
in respect of the very same incident, there is a counter
case registered against the complainant and another.
Therefore submits that the appellants are entitled for the
relief they have sought for in this appeal.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader has
strenuously contended that reading of the complaint
prima-facie discloses that the appellants have abused the
complainant in filthy language referring to his caste.
They also assaulted him with knife and club and caused
injuries to him which are reflected from the wound
certificate. He contends that in view of the prima-facie
material attracting the provisions of SC and ST Act,
appellants are not entitled for anticipatory bail and
therefore, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly
rejected their prayer. He has therefore sought to reject
the appeal.
7. It is alleged that the results of the election
held to the Grama Panchayat were announced on
27.12.2021. On 30.12.2021 at about 2.20 P.M., the
accused were bursting crackers to celebrate the winning
of their candidate, in front of the house of complainant.
The complainant requested them not to burst crackers as
his aunt is an heart patient. At that time, all the accused
forming an unlawful assembly, abused complainant in
filthy language referring to his caste and accused No.1
caused injuries to his left hand with a knife and also
punched on his head. Accused No.2 assaulted him with a
club on his waist, accused No.3 slapped on his face.
Accused Nos.4 and 5 also fisted him and kicked him. It is
also alleged that when complainant's cousin by name
Simhadri came to his rescue, he was also kicked by the
accused persons.
8. The learned counsel for the appellants relying
on un-reported decision of this Court in
Crl.P.No.7382/2017 disposed on 23.10.2017 has
contended that there are no specific allegation in the
complaint against the accused persons as to which of
them abused the complainant and in similar
circumstances, in the said case, this court has observed
that Section 18 of the Act is not an absolute bar to grant
anticipatory bail.
9. It is pertinent to see that as per the complaint
averments, when the incident took place, the villagers
namely Jayamma, Venkatappa, Nagaraj and others came
and intervened and thereafter the complainant and his
cousin Simhadri went to Shrinivaspura Government
Hospital and took treatment. The complainant's
statement was recorded from the hospital on the very
same day. The wound certificate of the complainant
shows that, he has sustained, (1) Swelling over left side
scalp 3X3c.m, (2) Linear aggressive wound over left
forearm on medial side 3c.m.X0.3c.m. The injuries are
mentioned as simple in nature.
10. Though it is alleged in the complaint that all
the accused have abused the complainant referring to his
caste and insulted him, the statement of witnesses would
reveal that it was accused No.1 who abused him
referring to his caste and it is he who assaulted him with
a knife and caused injuries, which are reflected in the
wound certificate. Hence at this stage, it cannot be said
that prima-facie case is not made out against
appellant No.1/accused No.1. The prosecution has to
establish its case against the accused in the course of
trial. There are no specific allegation against other
accused, at this stage, which would attract the provisions
under the SC/ST Act. Considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that,
accused No.1 is not entitled for the relief he has sought.
Insofar as other accused are concerned, for the reasons
noted supra, the findings recorded by the learned
Sessions Judge for rejecting their prayer for anticipatory
bail is not proper.
Hence, the following;
ORDER
Appeal is partly allowed.
The order passed by the court of
II Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Kolar, in
Crl.Mis.No.16/2022 dated 19.01.2022 is set aside,
insofar as appellant No.2 to 5/accused No.2 to 5 are
concerned and the said accused shall be released in the
event of their arrest in Cr.No.224/2021 of Srinivasapura
police station subject to following conditions;
i. Appellant Nos.2 to 5 shall appear before
the Investigation Officer within a period of
one week from the date of receipt of copy
of this order and shall execute a personal
bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with
two sureties for likesum.
ii. They shall furnish proof of their residential
address and shall inform the IO, if there is
any change in address
iii. They shall not tamper the prosecution
witnesses.
iv. They shall co-operate with the
investigation.
v. They shall appear before the trial court on
all dates of hearing.
Appeal in respect of appellant No.1/accused No.1 is
hereby dismissed.
Observations made in this order is restricted to the
disposal of this appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BH
