Laxman S/O Shrishailappa Kollar vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 12531 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

                          BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100461 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

1.    LAXMAN S/O. SHRISHAILAPPA KOLLAR
      AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE.


2.    SIDDAPPA S/O. DHARMANNA KAMBALI
      AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE.


3.    JATTEPPA S/O. GYANAPPA ALLIBHAVI
      AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE.


4.    BHIMANNA S/O. SHIVAPPA HORAKERI
      AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE


      ALL ARE R/O. BODNAYAKANDINNI-587115,
      TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOTE.

                                             ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. N. L. BATAKURKI, ADVOCATE)


AND:

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY PSI BAGALKOT RURAL P.S. - 587103,
      TQ AND DIST. BAGALKOTE,
      REP BY SPP,
      HIGH COURT BUILDING,
      DHARWAD.
                              -2-




                                    CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022



2.    NAGAPPA S/O. BAILAPPA CHALWADI
      AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE,
      R/O. BODNAYAKANDINNI-587115,
      TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOTE.

                                               ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 - SERVED



       THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC.ST
(POA) ACT, SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE    II   ADDITIONAL   DISTRICT    AND   SESSIONS    JUDGE,
BAGALKOT IN CRIL.MISC.NO.531/2022 TO DATE 15.09.2022
FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 143, 147, 148, 323, 324,
504, 354, R/W SECTION 149 OF THE IPC AND SECTION
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, AND ORDER TO
ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 5 ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN BAGALKOT RURAL P.S. CRIME
NO.154/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 143, 147, 148,
323, 324, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 149 OF THE IPC AND
SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SC.ST (POA) ACT, BY ALLOWING
THIS APPEAL.




       THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                             -3-




                                   CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022




                        JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by accused Nos.2,

3, 4 and 5 challenging the order dated 15.09.2022

passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.531/2022 by

the II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Bagalkote, whereunder the anticipatory bail

petition of the appellants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and

5 in respect of Crime No.154/2022 of Bagalkote

Rural Police Station registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323,

324, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian

Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for

brevity) and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as

'SC & ST (POA) Act', for brevity), came to be

rejected.

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants

and learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent No.1/State. Inspite of service of

notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and

unrepresented.

3. The case of the prosecution is that,

respondent No.2 has filed the complaint stating

that he is resident of Bodnayakandinni village of

Bagalkote Taluk, that on 04.09.2022 at about 6.00

p.m. near bus stand on 5th day immersion of

Ganesh idol a pooja was offered and auction of

Ganesh pooja items like fruits etc., was conducted

in which respondent No.2 has participated. At that

time accused No.1 abused him in filthy language,

on questioning by the respondent No.2 again

accused No.1 abused him taking his caste. It is

further stated that on 05.09.2022 accused No.1

called the father of respondent No.2 to his house

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

and asked him to advise his son and also abused

and threatened to his father. When he is ready to

go to Bagalkote at that time his father came and

informed him that accused No.1 asked him to

advise him and also threatened him, by that time

all other accused came there and caught hold

respondent No.2 and assaulted and abused him in

filthy language touching his caste. The said

complaint came to be registered in Crime

No.154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station for

the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,

148, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of

IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA)

Act. Accused Nos.1 to 7 apprehending their arrest

filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.531/2022 seeking

anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected

by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Bagalkote by order dated 15.09.2022. Therefore,

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

appellants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 have

challenged the said order in the instant appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants

/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 would contend that

there are no specific allegations against these

appellants to attract the offences alleged against

them. It is his further submission that the

allegations made against these appellants are

omnibus allegations. There are no specific overt

acts against each of the appellants in the

complaint. Accused No.1 has also filed the

complaint against the complainant and it is

registered in Crime No.155/2022 of Bagalkote

Rural Police Station for the offences punishable

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307,

504 read with Section 149 of IPC. It is his further

submission that as no prima facie case is made out

for the offence punishable under Section 3 of SC

and ST (POA) Act, the bar contained under Section

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

18 of SC and ST (POA) Act is not attracted. It is

his further submission that without considering all

these aspects, the learned Sessions/Special Judge

has passed the impugned order which requires

interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to

allow the appeal.

      5.   Per        contra,          learned         High         Court

Government       Pleader        would       contend          that     the

investigation    is    still   in   progress.           The    alleged

incident occurred near bus stand which is a public

place. The appellants abused the complainant

touching his caste, assaulted him with hands and

legs and caused injuries. The Investigating Officer

has recorded the statements of eyewitnesses.

Considering all these aspects, the learned

Sessions/Special Judge has rightly rejected the

anticipatory bail petition of these

appellants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 which does

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

not call for any interference by this Court. With

this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

6. Having regard to the submissions made

by learned counsel for the appellants and learned

High Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1-State, this Court has gone through the

averments of the complaint, FIR and the impugned

order.

7. The accusation against these appellants

and another accused in the complaint is that, on

05.09.2022 when the father of the complainant

came near bus stand to intimate what had happen

in the house of accused No.1, at that time accused

Nos.1 to 7 came there and started quarrelling with

the complainant. Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 have

abused the complainant in filthy language, held his

shirt and assaulted him with hands. At that time

accused Nos.1 and 3 held him tightly and accused

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

Nos.2 and 6 assaulted him with stone on his head,

left year and caused bleeding injuries. At that

time accused Nos.4 and 5 have assaulted him with

hands and kicked him and stamped with legs by

wearing chappal and abused him taking his caste.

At that time, accused Nos.6 and 7 have assaulted

him with hands and also all the accused assaulted

the persons who came to rescue him.

Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 alleged to have

together abused the complainant in filthy

language. It is also alleged that accused Nos.4

and 5 together abused the complainant taking his

caste. What are the words of abuse by accused

Nos.4 and 5 have not been stated in the complaint.

It is also not stated that among accused Nos.4 and

5 which accused used which abusive words to the

complainant. The abuse alleged to have been

made by accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 is omnibus

allegation therefore, at this stage it cannot be said

- 10 -

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

that accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 together used the

same words at the same time. Therefore at this

stage, there is no prima facie case against

appellants for the offences punishable under

Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA) Act. When

there is no prima facie case, the petition filed

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be entertained as

the bar under Section 18 of SC and ST (POA) Act is

not attracted. Without considering all these

aspects, learned Sessions/Special Court has

passed the impugned order which requires

interference by this Court. The other offences

alleged against the appellants are not punishable

with death or imprisonment for life. The

appellants have undertaken to co-operate with the

Police in investigation.

The main apprehension of the prosecution is

that if the appellants are granted anticipatory bail,

they will hamper the investigation and tamper the

- 11 -

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing

stringent conditions.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the

case and submission of the counsel, this Court is

of the view that there are valid grounds for setting

aside the impugned order and granting anticipatory

bail subject to certain terms and conditions.

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed. The impugned order

dated 15.09.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous

No.531/2022 by the II Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Bagalkote is set aside so far as

these appellants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 are

concerned. Consequently, appellants/accused

Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 are ordered to be released on

bail in the event of their arrest in Crime

- 12 -

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

No.154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station,

subject to the following conditions:

i. The appellants shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer.

ii. The appellants shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety.

iii. The appellants shall attend the Police Station concerned every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 06:00 p.m. and mark their presence for a period of two months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.

iv. The appellants shall co-operate with the investigating officer and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required.

- 13 -

CRL.A No. 100461 of 2022

v. The appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.

vi. The appellants shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SMM