Karnataka High Court
Shri. Rajesh A.C vs State Of Karnataka on 10 August, 2023
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1124 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. RAJESH A.C.
S/O CHIKKA THIMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
AT: ARUVANAHALLI VILLAGE
C A KERE HOBLI, MADDURU TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 433.
2. SHRI THIMMAPPA
S/O CHIKKATHAMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
AT ARUVANAHALLI VILLAGE
C A KERE HOBLI
MADDURU TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 433.
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA ...APPELLANTS
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SRI ABISHEK N N, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MADDURU POLICE STATION
MANDYA - 571 401.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. MISS PAVITRA
W/O ANANDA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
AT: ARUVANAHALLI VILLAGE
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
C A KERE HOBLI, MADDURU TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 433.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RENUKARDHYA, R D HCGP FOR R1
SRI R PRAMOD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 PRAYING TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTS No.1 TO 2/
ACCUSED No.1 TO 2 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN
CR.No.96/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES OF SECTIONS 504, 323,
324, 354(B), 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTION
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va) OF THE SCHEDULE CAST
AND SCHEDULE TRIBE (POA) ACT 2015, REGISTERED BY THE
RESPONDENT MADDUR POLICE ON 29.03.2023 BY SETTING
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.04.2023, PASSED BY
THE LEARNED V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT MANDYA IN CRL.MISC.No.341/2023.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellants - accused
Nos.1 and 2, praying to set-aside the order dated
25.04.2023 passed by the V Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Mandya in Crl.Misc.No.341/2023,
whereunder, the anticipatory bail petition filed by the
appellants - accused Nos.1 and 2 in respect of Crime
No.96/2023, Madduru Police Station, for the offences
under Sections 323, 324, 354B, 504 and 506 r/w Section
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short hereinafter
referred to as 'IPC') and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)
and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short
hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -
State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that, respondent
No.2 filed a complaint stating that on 21.03.2023 at
7.00 pm., her husband Sri.Anand went to the shop of
accused No.3 in order to purchase groceries. At that time,
accused No.1 was sitting there, seeing the complainant's
husband entering into the shop, abused him in filth
language by taking his caste name and when the
complainant's husband Sri.Anand was proceeding towards
the Colony, at that time, all the accused Nos.1 to 3 picked
up quarrel with him, assaulted him with club. After
hearing the noise, when the complainant came to rescue
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
her husband, the accused persons abused her in filthy
language, pulled her nighty and outraged her modesty and
all the accused persons gave life threat to her and
threatened her not to lodge a police complaint.
4. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime
No.96/2023 of Maddur Police Station for the aforesaid
offences. The appellants and accused No.3 apprehending
their arrest filed Crl.Misc.No.341/2023 seeking anticipatory
bail and the same came to be rejected by the impugned
order, which has been challenged in this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants - accused
Nos.1 and 2 would contend that the alleged incident has
occurred on 21.03.2023 and a complaint came to be filed
on 29.03.2023 and there is a delay of more than eight
days in filing the complaint. The complainant's statement
has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, wherein
she has not stated the names of the persons who
quarreled with her and her husband. As per the wound
certificate, the injured have taken treatment on
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
22.03.2023, but as per the averments of the complaint
they took treatment on the date of incident. He further
submits that on perusal of the prosecution material, there
is no prima facie case against the appellants to attract the
offences alleged against them.
6. The Special Court without considering the said
aspects invoking bar under Sections 18 and 18(A)(2) of
the Act has rejected their anticipatory bail petition, which
requires interference by this Court. With this, he prayed
to allow the appeal.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
for respondent No.1 would contend that on perusal of the
complaint, column No.17 of the charge sheet, statement of
CW1 and the statement of other witnesses would clearly
reveal the acts of appellant No.1 - accused No.1, who
abused the complainant and her husband taking their
caste name which attracts the offence under Section 3 of
the Act. Therefore, the Court cannot entertain the petition
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, as there is a bar under
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
Sections 18 and 18(A)(2) of the Act. Considering all these
aspects, the learned Special Judge has passed the
impugned order which does not call for any interference by
this Court. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 also argued in
line with the arguments of learned High Court Government
Pleader.
9. The alleged incident has taken place on 21.03.2023
at 7.00 pm., and a complaint came to be filed on
29.03.2023. The complainant on hearing the sound of
galata went to the spot. At that time, appellant No.1 -
accused No.1 abused her in filthy language taking her
caste name, held her hands, pulled her and assaulted on
her chest and held her tuft and kicked her and made her
to lie on the ground. In the complaint itself, there is a
mention of the persons who were present and who pacified
the quarrel. The statement of those persons have been
recorded and they are cited as eye witnesses
(CWs.3 to 5).
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
10. On perusal of the statement of CWs.3 to 5, it reveals
that appellant No.1 - accused No.1 abused the
complainant and her husband Sri. Anand in filthy language
taking their caste name. Therefore, there is a prima facie
case against appellant No.1 -accused No.1 for the offences
under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Act. As there is
a bar under Sections 18 and 18(A)(2) of the Act, the
petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., cannot be
entertained. Considering the said aspect, the Special
Court has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition of
appellant No.1 - accused No.1.
11. As per the averments of the complaint, statement of
eye witnesses and statement of the injured does not
reveal any abuse by accused Nos.2 and 3, touching the
caste of the complainant or her husband. Therefore, there
is no prima facie case against appellant No.2 - accused
No.2 for the offence under Section 3 of the Act. Without
considering this aspect, the Special Court has rejected the
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
anticipatory bail petition of appellant No.2 - accused No.2.
In the result, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned order
dated 25.04.2023 passed by the V Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Mandya in Crl.Misc.No.341/2023, insofar
as appellant No.2 - accused No.2 is concerned, is
set-aside. Appellant No.2 - accused No.2 is granted
anticipatory bail and is ordered to be released on bail in
the event of his arrest, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The appellant No.2 - accused No.2 shall
execute a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), with one
surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The appellant No.2 - accused No.2 shall
voluntarily appear before the jurisdictional
Court and execute a bail bond and furnish the
surety.
(iii) The appellant No.2 - accused No.2 shall
not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
NC: 2023:KHC:28483
CRL.A No. 1124 of 2023
(iv) The appellant No.2 - accused No.2 shall
attend the Court on all the dates of hearing,
unless exempted and co-operate in speedy
disposal of the case.
The appeal insofar as appellant No.1 - accused No.1
is concerned stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GH
