Syed Hussain @ Hussain vs State By Aldur Police Station
2023 Latest Caselaw 3313 Kant

                                                -1-
                                                       NC: 2023:KHC:20598
                                                           CRL.A No. 931 of 2023




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

                                             BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 931 OF 2023

                      BETWEEN:

                      SYED HUSSAIN @ HUSSAIN
                      S/O SYED BUDDEN SAB,
                      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
                      R/O SANTHE MYDANA, ALDUR VILLAGE,
                      CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT- 577101
                                                                    ...APPELLANT

                      (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.   STATE BY ALDUR POLICE STATION
                           ALDUR,
                           CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT
Digitally signed by
SUNITHA
GANGARAJU                  REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Location: High             HIGH COURT BUILDING
Court of Karnataka         BANGALORE 01

                      2.  MANJUPRASAD
                          S/O ANANDA,
                          AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
                          R/O SANTHE MYDANA, ALDUR VILLAGE,
                          CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 577101
                                                            ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI. S VISHWA MURTHY HCGP FOR R1
                          R2 SERVED)
                                      -2-
                                            NC: 2023:KHC:20598
                                              CRL.A No. 931 of 2023




     THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
11.05.2023 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS COURT AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CR.NO.72/2023
CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL,
REGISTERED      ALDUR     POLICE    FOR  THE   OFFENCE
P/U/S.504,324,307,506     R/W    SEC.34  OF  IPC   AND
SEC.3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) OF SC/ST ACT 2015.

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


                               JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused No.1 under

Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC/ST (POA)

Act') to set aside the order of dismissal of the bail application

filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C passed by the

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru

(for short 'trial Court') in Crime No.72/2023.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent No.1-State. Respondent No.2 served but

unrepresented.

NC: 2023:KHC:20598 CRL.A No. 931 of 2023

3. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint

was filed by Sri. Manjuprasad i.e., respondent No.2 herein

before the Aldur police on 20.04.2023 alleging that accused

Nos.1 and 2 being the neighbors started abusing the

complainant as said to be left the dog near their house. When

he questioned the same on 19.04.2023 at about 10.00 p.m, the

accused-present appellant and another accused No.2 abused

the complainant in filthy language and with an intention to

commit murder they assaulted on the complainant and his

father on their head with club and caused injuries. Then one

Suri and Madhu shifted them to the hospital. Accordingly,

complaint came to be filed and the appellant was arrested on

20.04.2023 and remanded to judicial custody. The police

registered the FIR against the appellants for the non-bailable

offences, which is punishable under Sections 504, 324, 307,

506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections

3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Hence, the appellant No.1

approached the trial Court for granting bail. The trial Court

vide impugned order dated 11.05.2023 dismissed the

application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the

appellant No.1 is before this Court by way of appeal.

NC: 2023:KHC:20598 CRL.A No. 931 of 2023

4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that

the appellant is innocent and has not committed the alleged

offences. He has not assaulted the victim. The appellant is in

judicial custody for almost two months. The injuries sustained

by the complainant and his father are simple in nature. The

investigation might have completed, but the charge sheet is not

yet filed. Hence, prayed for setting aside the impugned order

passed by the trial Court.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP objected the appeal and

contended that the statement of the complainant clearly shows

that there is prima-facie material against the appellant for

having committed the offence and assaulted the victim and his

father by club. The trial Court after considering the materials on

record, rightly rejected the bail application. Hence, he prays

for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the

records, which reveals that the appellant and respondent No.2

are the neighbours and quarrel took place in respect of a dog

belongs to the complainant said to be near the house of the

accused, therefore they picked up quarrel. When the same was

NC: 2023:KHC:20598 CRL.A No. 931 of 2023

questioned the appellant abused the complainant in filthy

language and assaulted him. However the appellant is in

custody from 20.04.2023. The injured persons are already

discharged from the hospital on the same day by taking

treatment. The injury certificate reveals that cut lacerated

wound on the head on both the injured which were simple in

nature. The trial Court has not considered the injuries

sustained by them which are simple in nature. Ofcourse, the

alleged offences under the SC/ST Act is serious one and the

appellant is in custody for nearly two months. The investigation

might have completed and the charge sheet is not yet filed.

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances, without

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and by

imposing stringent conditions, if the appellant is granted bail,

no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution.

Appellant No.1 is deserves to be released on bail.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The order of the

trial Court passed in Crime No.72/2023 dated 11.05.2023 is

hereby set aside.

NC: 2023:KHC:20598 CRL.A No. 931 of 2023

The trial Court is directed to release the

appellant/accused No.1 on bail registered by respondent police

for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 324, 307, 506

read with 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of the SC/ST

Act, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Appellant shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer or the concerned trial Court;

(ii) Appellant shall not indulge himself in similar offences strictly;

(iii) Appellant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;

(iv) Appellant shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for;

(v) If in case, the appellant violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution or victim is at liberty to move this Court seeking cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SKS