Karnataka High Court
Suresh Poojary vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.294/2022
BETWEEN
SURESH POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
S/O. MOOKU POOJARTHI,
R/O. KADINATHRA,
BIJOOR VILLAGE, BYNDOOR TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 232. ... APPELLANT
[BY SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL, ADVOCATE]
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BYNDOOR POLICE STATION,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SRI. N. RAVICHANDRA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
S/O. N.A. NAGARAJ,
AYAPPA COMPOUND,
NADANAVANA VILLAGE, BYNDOOR TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 214. ... RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI. KRISHNAKUMAR K.K., HCGP FOR R.1/STATE;
SRI. HARISHA A.S., ADVOCATE FOR R.2]
***
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14 (A)(2)
OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 07/02/2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.730/2021 (CRIME
NO.212/2021) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
504, 506 AND 307 OF IPC., SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(V)
2
3(2)(V-a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE ADDL.
DISTICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA)
AND RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.212/2021 OF BYNDOOR
POLICE STATION.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred under Section 14(A)(2) of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 praying to set aside the order
passed by the learned Sessions Judge, rejecting petition
filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., and consequently, to
release the appellant on anticipatory bail.
2. Heard both side and perused the material on
record.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has filed
statement of objections.
4. Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against
the appellant herein, registered in Crime No.212/2021 of
Byndoor Police Station for offences punishable under
Sections 504, 506 and 307 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s), 3(2)(V), 3(2)(v-a) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in
short 'SC/ST (POA) Act').
5. It is alleged that on 27.12.2021 at about 6.55
p.m., when the complainant/victim was returning to his
house on a scooter along with one Venkatesh Devadiga,
the accused who came in a car abused him in filthy
language referring to his caste as 'PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀÌ¼É ¤ªÀÄUÉ
PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ J£ÀßzÉ ¨ÉÃgÉ K£ÀÄ JAzÀÄ PÀgÉAiÀĨÉÃPÀÄ. ¤Ã£ÀÄ JµÁÖzÀgÀÆ ¨ÉÃr
w£ÀÄߪÀÅzÉà fêÀ£À PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̼Éà ¤ªÀÄUÉ CºÀAPÁgÀ §A¢zÉ ¤£ÀߣÀÄß fêÀ
¸À»vÀ ©qÀĪÀÅ¢®è'. There was a verbal exchange of words and
thereafter the accused brought a long knife from the car
and assaulted over the left side of complainant's head,
left hand and left elbow. Seeing this, one Janardhana
Mogaveera and Manohara intervened and rescued the
complainant.
6. The learned counsel for appellant has
contended the entire allegations are false and it is a
concocted story. He contends that the complaint is
lodged on inimical terms as there is some dispute
between the brother of petitioner and the complainant.
He submits that the complainant is a rowdy sheeter
against whom there are several cases registered, on the
other hand, the appellant has no criminal antecedents.
He submits that the appellant is not required for
investigation as the charge sheet is already filed and he
submits that the complainant is a Government Servant
and in view of the false complaint filed against him he
will be put to great hardship in the event of his arrest.
He therefore, seeks to allow the appeal and grant
anticipatory bail to the appellant by imposing conditions.
7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.2 has vehemently opposed the relief sought by the
appellant contending that there is a prima facie case
against the appellant attracting the provisions of the
SC/ST (POA) Act and therefore there is a clear bar for
entertaining the petition filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. He submits that the learned Sessions Judge has
taken into consideration all the aspects of the case and
rejected the prayer seeking anticipatory bail. He further
submits that in the event of grant of relief to the
appellant, there is likelihood of threatening the
complainant. Accordingly, he has sought to reject the
appeal.
8. The learned High Court Government Pleader
has contended that the appellant has been absconding
from the date of registration of the case. Now the charge
sheet has been filed, which further substantiates the
allegations made in the First Information Report. He
submits that in view of the specific allegations against
the appellant that he has abused the complainant
insulting his caste etc., he is not entitled for the relief he
has sought. Accordingly, he has sought to dismiss the
appeal.
9. I have perused the complaint averments. It is
stated that the accused abused the complainant as
'PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀÌ¼É ¤ªÀÄUÉ PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ J£ÀßzÉ ¨ÉÃgÉ K£ÀÄ JAzÀÄ PÀgÉAiÀĨÉÃPÀÄ.
¤Ã£ÀÄ JµÁÖzÀgÀÆ ¨ÉÃr w£ÀÄߪÀÅzÉà fêÀ£À PÀƸÁ¼ÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̼Éà ¤ªÀÄUÉ CºÀAPÁgÀ
§A¢zÉ ¤£ÀߣÀÄß fêÀ ¸À»vÀ ©qÀĪÀÅ¢®è'. It is not disputed that the
complainant belong to scheduled caste. The abusive
words used by the accused prima facie attracts the
provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act. Since the appellant is
accused of committing the offence punishable under the
provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act, as rightly contended
by the respondent's counsel, the petition filed under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C., is not maintainable. Further, the
accused is also alleged to have caused injuries to the
complainant with a talwar. It is seen that the statement
of the victim is recorded from the hospital. In the
complaint itself it is stated that he was shifted to
Kundapur Government Hospital wherein, he was
admitted as an inpatient. Even though the wound
certificate reveals that he has sustained simple injuries,
the injuries are on the forehead etc., which prima facie
establish the incident in question. There are no grounds
made out to set aside the order passed by the learned
Sessions Judge and to allow the appeal. The appeal is
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HB/-
