Sri Mahantesh S/O Bhoopanna ... vs State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 11624 Kant

                             -1-




                                   CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                          BEFORE
     THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100332 OF 2022



BETWEEN:

1.    SRI MAHANTESH S/O BHOOPANNA BEVOOR
      AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
      R/O. MATALDINNI, TQ. YALBURGA
      DIST. KOPPAL

2.    SRI KARIBEERAPPA GOUDAR
       S/O PITAMBERAPP
      AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
      R/O. MARKET TALKERI
      TQ. YALBURGA, DIST. KOPPAL
                                              ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE, ADVOCATE)


AND:

1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY BEVOOR POLICE STATION
      REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
      HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001

2.    SRI SHASHIDHAR S/O KANAKARAYA GADAD
      AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
      R/O. MURUDI, TQ. YALBURGA
      DIST. KOPPAL 583 231

                                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT
NO.1.
RESPONDENT NO.2 SERVED.)
                                   -2-




                                          CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022


     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND
ST (POA) ACT, SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOPPAL IN
CRIL.MISC.NO. 589/2022 BY ITS ORDER DATED 14.07.2022,
IN THE COMPLAINT REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.84/2022 OF
BEVOOR P.S. FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 143, 147,
341, 323, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND U/S 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(2)(VA) OF SC/ST AMENDMENT ACT-2015 AND DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF ARREST, IN SO FOR AS ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2
ARE CONCERNED.
     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                           JUDGMENT

challenging the order passed in Crl.Misc.

No.589/2022 dated 14.07.2022 by the learned

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal,

wherein the anticipatory bail petition filed by the

appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 in respect of Crime

No.84/2022 of Bevoor Police Station registered for

the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,

341, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of The

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) and

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the

Scheduled Tribes and the Scheduled Tribes

(prevention of atrocities Act), 1989 (hereinafter

referred to as 'SC &ST Act', for brevity) came to be

rejected.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned

counsel for the appellants and the learned High

Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1/State.

In spite of service of notice, respondent No.2

remained absent and unrepresented.

3. The case of the prosecution is that, on

20.06.2022, the complainant in order to purchase

the cattle went along with one Sri. Hanumanthappa

Kusti, Kanakappa Maranal and Hanamanthappa Seeri

at 4:00 pm, they left towards Hirevankalakunta,

when they reached Uppaladinni cross, they wanted

to have meals and they went to Poorvi hotel. In the

hotel, accused Nos.1 to 5 were already taking meals

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

and due to previous political ill-will, at 5:30 pm

when they were coming out, accused No.1 came near

the complainant and abused him in filthy language.

At that time, when the complainant told to talk

properly, all the accused surrounded him and they

dragged the shirt and assaulted with hands and

accused No.1 kicked him on his thigh and accused

No.3 slapped him. Accused No.4 abused in filthy

language and kicked the complainant. Accused Nos.1

and 2 abused by saying that these caste people are

behind Rs.50/- drinks and Rs.50/- non-veg and

nobody will question even if they murdered them.

The said complaint came to be registered in Crime

No.84/2022 of Bevoor Police Station for the

aforesaid offences. The petitioners along with

accused Nos.3 to 5 apprehending their arrest have

filed Crl.Misc.No.589/2022 seeking anticipatory bail

and the same came to be rejected so far as the

petitioners are concerned by order dated 14.07.2022

and allowed so far as accused Nos.3 to 5 are

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

concerned. Therefore, the appellants have

challenged the said order in the instant appeal.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the

appellants would contend that accused No.1 to 5 are

from different villages and the complainant is the

resident of a different village. The complainant is

not holding any political post and there is no

political rivalry. It is his further submission that the

allegation against the accused persons regarding

abuse, touching the caste of the complainant, is

omnibus statement. It is his further submission that

at this stage, it cannot be said that, which of the

accused abused the complainant touching his caste.

Therefore, there is no prima facie case to attract the

offence under the provisions of SC & ST Act.

Without considering al these aspects, the learned

Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order

which requires interference by this Court. With this

he prayed to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory

bail to the appellants.

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader contends that, even though the accused and

the complainant are from different village but are of

the same taluk. Charge-sheet material show prima

facie case against the appellants and the other

accused for the offence alleged against them. CWs.4

to 8 are eye witnesses to the incident. The wound

certificate of the complainant reveal that he has

sustained an injury to arm and thigh and they are

stated to be simple in nature. The learned Sessions

Judge, considering the averments of the compliant

has rightly passed by the impugned order which

does not require any interference by this Court. With

this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

6. Having regard to the submission made by

the learned counsel for the appellants and the

learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court

has gone through the averments of the complaint,

FIR and the charge-sheet appears furnished by the

learned Government Pleader.

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

7. The accusation against the appellants and

other accused is that, they were sitting in Poorvi

Hotel where the complainant and others went there

for having meals. There, the accused persons abused

the complainant in filthy language and accused No.1

assaulted on his thigh, accused No.3 slapped him on

his cheek, accused No.4 abused in filthy language

and kicked the complainant and accused Nos.1 and 2

abused him taking the name of his caste and abetted

other accused to assault him and kick him. At that

time, accused Nos.1 and 2 abused the complainant

by saying that these caste people are behind Rs.50/-

drinks and Rs.50/- non-veg and nobody will question

them even if they murdered them. The said abuse

by the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 to the

complainant is omnibus. On reading of the

averments of the complaint, at this stage, it cannot

be said that which of the appellants i.e. accused

Nos.1 and 2 have abused the complainant touching

his caste. It is not possible by two persons abusing

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

the complainant with the same words at the same

time. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that

there is a prima facie case against the appellants for

the offences under the provisions of SC & ST Act.

Therefore, the bar contained under Section 18 of SC

& ST Act is not attracted. Without considering all

these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has

passed the impugned order which requires

interference by this Court. The other offences

alleged against the petitioners under IPC are not

punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

The main apprehension of the prosecution is

that if the appellants are granted anticipatory bail,

they will hamper the investigation, tamper the

prosecution witnesses and threaten the complainant.

The said objection 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

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

view that there are valid grounds for setting aside

the impugned order by allowing the appeal and

granting anticipatory bail to the appellants subject

to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to

pass the following:

ORDER

The criminal appeal is allowed. The order dated

14.07.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.589/2022 by the

learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Koppal, is set aside. Consequently, the petition filed

by the appellants under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is

allowed and the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are

ordered to be released on bail in the event of their

arrest in Crime No.84/2022 of Bevoor Police Station

subject to the following conditions:

i) The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 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 the jurisdictional Court.

- 10 -

CRL.A No. 100332 of 2022

ii) The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall voluntarily appear before the jurisdictional Court within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety.

shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

iv) The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

kmv