Jagadisha H M vs State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 27 Kant

                                             -1-
                                                    CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1936 OF 2022
                 BETWEEN:

                 JAGADISHA H M
                 S/O LATE MANDANNA
                 AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
                 RESIDING AT HANAGALLU VILLAGE
                 SOMWARPET TALUK
                 KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236.
                                                             ...APPELLANT

                 (BY SRI. MAHADEVA R K, ADVOCATE)

                 AND:

                 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
                 BY SOMWARPET P S
                 REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                 HIGH COURT COMPLEX
                 BENGALURU - 560 001.

Digitally signed by 2. MANJU H M
SANDHYA S           S/O LATE MUTHA
Location: High      AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
Court of Karnataka
                 RESIDING AT HANGALU VILLAGE
                 SOMWARPET TALUK
                 KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236.
                                                          ...RESPONDENTS

                 (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R-1,
                  R-2 IS SERVED)
                              -2-
                                    CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022




     THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE I
ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE KODAGU-MADIKERI IN
CRL.MISC.NO.300/2022 DATED 17.10.2022 AND           GRANT
ANTICIPATORY BAIL BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO
ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS
ARREST IN CR.NO.125/2022 OF SOMWARPET POLICE STATION,
SOMWARPET SUB DIVISION, KODAGU DISTRICT FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 506
OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI KODAGU DISTRICT.

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

                        JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the sole accused seeking

setting aside of the order dated 17.10.2022 passed in

Crl.Misc. No. 300/2022 whereunder anticipatory bail

petition filed by this appellant - accused in crime No.

125/2022 of Somwarpet Police station for the offence

punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC and Section

3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

came to be rejected.

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

2. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the

appellant and learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.

1 - State. Inspite of service of notice respondent No. 2

remained absent and unrepresented.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that this appellant

accused used to quarrel with respondent No. 2 -

complainant unnecessarily without any reason and he used

to abuse him by touching his caste and this respondent

No. 2 has not filed any complaint against the appellant. It

is further case that atrocity case has been registered

against the appellant accused and he has been convicted

and he has been released on bail and inspite of that he

had not learnt a lesson and now the appellant accused has

given life threat to the complainant on 26.09.2022 at

about 03.15 pm near the house of one Koli Gurappa. The

said complaint came to be registered in crime No.

125/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 504

and 506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellant - accused

apprehending his arrested filed Crl.Misc. No. 300/2022

seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be

rejected by impugned order dated 17.10.2022. Therefore,

the appellant accused has challenged the impugned order.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend

that what has been stated in the complaint are all previous

incidents and what is alleged is that on 26.09.2022 this

appellant accused at about 03.15 pm gave life threat to

the complainant near the house of Koli Gurappa. It is his

further submission that on looking to the entire averments

of the complaint offences under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of

SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are not attracted and

therefore, there is no prima facie case against this accused

for the said offences. It is his further submission that

earlier to filing of the present complaint the appellant

accused had filed a complaint against this respondent No.

2 - complainant which came to be registered in crime No.

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

124/2022 and therefore, as a counter, respondent No. 2

has lodged the present complaint. Without considering all

these aspects learned Sessions Judge passed the

impugned order which requires interference by this Court.

With this he prayed to allow the appeal and grant

anticipatory bail to the appellant - accused.

5. Per contra, Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP

appearing for respondent No. 1 - State would contend that

looking to the complaint averments it is clear that the

appellant abused the complainant touching his caste in

public which attracts offence under Section 3(1)(r),

3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. As there is

a bar under Section 18 and 18-A of the SC/ST (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act to entertain a petition under Section 438

of Cr.P.C. learned Sessions Judge has rightly rejected the

anticipatory bail petition of the appellant which does not

call for any interference by this Court. With this she

prayed to dismiss the appeal.

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High

Court Government Pleader this Court has gone through

the averments of the complaint, FIR in crime Nos.

124/2022 and 125/2022.

7. A perusal of the complaint filed by respondent No.

2 - complainant reveals that earlier to the date of incident

the appellant accused used to abuse him by touching his

caste and atrocity case is registered against him and he

came to be convicted and subsequently he has been

granted bail. On 26.09.2022 at about 03.15 pm, near the

house of Koli Gurappa, the appellant has given him life

threat. As on the alleged date of incident, i.e., 26.09.2022

there is no abuse by this appellant touching the caste of

respondent No. 2 - complainant. Therefore, at this stage it

cannot be said that there is a prima facie case against

appellant - accused for the offence punishable under

Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

Act. More so a complaint has been filed by this appellant -

accused against respondent No. 2 - complainant and it

came to be registered in crime No. 124/2022 and

subsequent to this, respondent No. 2 has filed the present

complaint which is registered in crime No. 125/2022.

Therefore, it appears that the said complaint has been

filed as an after thought and counter to the complaint filed

by the appellant - accused. As there is no prima facie case

to attract offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r),

3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the bar

contained under Section 18 and 18-A of the SC/ST

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not attracted. Without

considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has

passed the impugned order which requires interference by

this Court.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and

submission of the learned counsel for the parties, there

are valid grounds for setting aside the impugned order and

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

granting anticipatory bail to the appellant - accused. In

the result, I proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated

17.10.2022 passed by the I Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Kodagu, Madikeri, in Crl.Misc. No.

300/2022 is set aside. Consequently, the appellant

accused is granted anticipatory bail and he is ordered to

be released on bail in the event of his arrest in crime No.

125/2022 of Somwarpet Police Station subject to the

following conditions:

i. The appellant - accused 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 Investigating Officer.

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

ii. The appellant - accused shall voluntarily surrender

before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from

this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety.

iii. The appellant - accused shall remain present before

the Police station concerned on first and third Sunday

of every month between 10.00 am to 02.00 pm and

mark his attendance for a period of three months or

till the filing of the final report whichever is earlier.

iv. The appellant - accused shall cooperate with

investigation and make himself available for

interrogation whenever required.

v. The appellant - accused 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 the Police Officer.

- 10 -

CRL.A No. 1936 of 2022

vi. The appellant - accused 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

LRS