Karnataka High Court
Nanangouda vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 14 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
CRL.A No. 200207 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200207 OF 2023 (U/S 14 (A))
BETWEEN:
NANAGOUDA
S/O CHANNAPPAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/0: NANDARAGI, TALUK CHADACHAN
DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA - 586101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH
REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP,
Digitally signed
by SHILPA R KALABURAGI BENCH,
TENIHALLI (THROUGH PSI, ZALAKI POLICE STATION,
Location: HIGH DISTRICT- VIJAYAPURA - 586101.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. APPASAHEB
S/O TAMMARAY WALIKAR
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
R/O: NANDARAGI, TALUK CHADACHAN
DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAJKUMAR A. KORWAR, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
CRL.A No. 200207 of 2023
THIS CRL.A FILED U/SEC. 14-A OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
16.06.2023 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.797/2023 BY II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE,
VIJAYAPURA, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY;
THAT, FOR THE REASONS STATED ABOVE AMONGST OTHERS,
GRANT THE REGULAR BAIL TO THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1
IN SPL. CASE (SC/ST) NO.20/2020 IN ZALAKI P.S. DIST.
VIJAYAPUR, FIR (CRIME NO.33/2020) PENDING ON THE FILE
OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPECIAL
JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SECS.
354(A), 376, 306, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC. 3(1)
(w)(r)(s) OF SC/ST PA ACT, 2015.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The appellant has approached this Court seeking to set
aside the impugned order dated 16.06.2023 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.797/2023 by the learned II Additional District and
Sessions Judge at Vijayapur (for short, the 'Trial Court') and for
grant of regular bail.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the informant lodged
the first information against the accused stating that on
17.05.2020 at 3.00 p.m. his mother had been to the agriculture
land. The informant after sometime, proceeded to the land and
found the accused committing sexual assault on his mother and
on seeing the informant, he ran away from the scene of
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
occurrence. The informant tried to chase accused No.1, but he
could escaped by leaving his motorcycle bearing Regn.No.KA-
28/EH-4218 at the spot. The victim was very much upset and
felt humiliated by the act of accused No.1. Subsequently,
accused Nos. 2 to 4 came and warned the informant not to
reveal about the incident to anybody and not to lodge any
complaint. They offered money and even offered the informant
to keep the motorcycle of accused No.1 with him, as a price for
not lodging the complaint. At about 7.30 p.m., on the same
day, the victim went out of the house under the pretext of
going to answer nature's call, but she did not returned.
Subsequently, it was found that the victim committed suicide
by hanging, obviously due to the inducement and the abetment
by the accused. Therefore, the informant requested the police
to register the case and to initiate legal action. Accordingly, the
police registered the FIR and took up investigation. It is stated
that investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed against
accused No.1 to 5.
3. Heard Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, learned
counsel for the appellant and Sri Rajkumar A. Korwar, learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended
that the appellant is the sole accused before Trial Court. The
earlier petitions, which were preferred by him seeking grant of
bail were rejected by this Court. However, the liberty was
reserved in his favour to move an application for bail before the
Trial Court after examination of CW.1, who is the material
witness. Now CW.1 is examined as PW.1. However, after
leading evidence in part, the prosecution has deferred further
examination of the said witness. In the mean time, other
family members of PW.1 were examined and they have not
supported the case of the prosecution. The appellant was
apprehended on 02.06.2020 and since then he is in judicial
custody. It amounts to pre-trail punishment. The appellant is
not having any criminal antecedents. Therefore, prays for
allowing the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
submitted that similar bail petitions were came to be dismissed
on earlier occasions. CW.1 is not fully examined before the
Trial Court. Under such circumstances, the appellant is not
entitled for the relief and accordingly, he prays for dismissal of
the appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
6. Perused the materials on record. In view of the
rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the
parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the appellant is entitled for grant of
bail under Section 14(A) of the SC/ST (POA) Act"
My answer to the above point is in the 'Negative' for the
following:
REASONS
7. The allegations made against the appellant are
heinous in nature. The appellant had approached this Court by
filing Criminal Petition No.200841/2020 seeking grant of bail.
The same was came to be dismissed vide order dated
09.12.2020. Later, the appellant has preferred Criminal Appeal
No.200113/2021 again seeking grant of bail. The said appeal
was also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated
16.07.2021 holding that he is not entitled for bail at that stage.
However, liberty was reserved with the appellant to move
similar petition before the Trial Court once the material witness
i.e., CW.1 is examined. Admittedly, CW.1 is examined as PW.1
and his chief examination is not yet completed. It is stated
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9235
that in the mean time, other witnesses are examined by the
prosecution and they have not supported the case of the
prosecution. But, the fact remains that CW.1, who is examined
as PW.1 has fully supported the case of the prosecution and his
examination is not yet completed. Under such circumstances, I
do not find any reason to entertain the appeal. Hence, I
answer the above point in the negative and proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SRT
CT-VD
