Sathwika B P vs State By
2023 Latest Caselaw 2457 Kant

                                                   -1-
                                                              CRL.A No. 561 of 2023




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                 DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2023

                                                BEFORE
                                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.561 OF 2023
                      BETWEEN:

                      SATHWIKA B. P. S/O PRAKASHA,
                      AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
                      COOLIE, R/O BHADRASITE, HEMMAKKI VILLAGE,
                      THALAGODU, KALASA TALUK,
                      CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.
                                                                        ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.   STATE BY KALASA POLICE,
                           CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 101.
                           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                           HIGH COURT BUILDING,
                           BENGALURU - 560 001.

                      2.   SHIVAKUMAR M. S/O MANJUNATH,
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN             AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
N
Location: HIGH
                           R/O S.K.MEGAL, SAMSE VILLAGE,
COURT OF                   KALASA TALUK,
KARNATAKA
                           CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 101.
                                                                     ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI. B.J. ROHITH, HCGP FOR R1;
                          SRI. H.K. PAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

                            THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST
                      (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
                      13.01.2023 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE
                      AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.1266/2022 AND ETC.

                           THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
                      COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                -2-
                                         CRL.A No. 561 of 2023




                          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 438 of Cr.P.C passed by the I Additional

Sessions and Special Judge, Chikkamagaluru in

Crl.Misc.No.1266/2022.

2. Respondent No.2 has filed statement of objections.

3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for the

respondent-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.

4. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint

filed by respondent No.2, the police registered the case on

21.12.2022. It was alleged that on 17.12.2022 when the

appellant was in room after completion of work, at about

1:40 p.m., the present appellant/accused No.1 and accused

No.2 along with others trespassed into the house of the

complainant, picked up quarrel with him stating that he should

not do electric work in their village. Taking name of the caste,

CRL.A No. 561 of 2023

accused No.2 said to have assaulted him on mouth with

hammer due to which his three teeth were broken and fell

down. They also said to have assaulted and kicked him with

legs and abused him with filthy language by taking the name of

caste and threatened him that they would commit his murder,

if he does electric work in their village. after that he took

treatment and came home. Again on 21.12.2022 at 11:10 p.m.

when the complainant was in room, the accused persons came

there and picked up quarrel and abused him in filthy language

and assaulted him with iron rod once again on his face and

broken his teeth causing bleeding injuries. The accused persons

kicked him and threatened him with dire consequence. As soon

as one Ashwath, friend of the complainant entered into the

house, the accused persons ran away. Thereafter, the

complainant has lodged the complaint against the accused and

after registering the FIR the police tried to arrest the

appellant/accused No.1. Hence, he has approached the Special

Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail which came to be

dismissed on 13.01.2023. Hence, the appellant/accused No.1 is

before this Court.

CRL.A No. 561 of 2023

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended

that there is delay of four days in lodging the complaint. The

alleged incident took place on 17.12.2022 and but the

complaint came to be filed on 21.12.2022. Even otherwise

there is no specific overtact against the appellant as accused

No.2 is said to have assaulted on the mouth of the complainant

with hammer due to which the teeth were broken which

attracts Section 326 of IPC as against accused No.2 and not

against present appellant/accused No.1. The incident took place

in the room which is not a public place. Therefore, the Special

Act under Section 3(1)(r)(s) does not attract. He is ready to

abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed

to allow the appeal.

6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader

seriously objected the appeal and contended that both the

accused persons are still absconding for last six months and are

required for custodial interrogation.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 also seriously

objected the appeal and contended that the accused persons

not only assaulted on 17.12.2022 but also on 22.12.2022 and

CRL.A No. 561 of 2023

three teeth were broken due to the assault and have also

abused the complainant in filthy language taking the name of

caste, which attracts Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the

SC/ST (POA) Act and they are required for custodial

interrogation and there is bar under Section 18 of the Act for

grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the

appeal.

8. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the

records, which reveals that the complainant lodged the

complaint only on 21.12.2022, even though the first incident

took place on 17.12.2022. On perusal of the records especially

the wound certificate reveals that on 17.12.2022 he has

suffered bleeding injuries. Though the complainant went to the

private clinic and the history of the assault has been mentioned

in the wound certificate at the private hospital, he did not

intimated the police as it is medico-legal case. Even though the

complainant came home and stayed in the room, once again

accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted with iron rod. The intention of

the appellant was that the complainant should not do electric

work in the village as the complainant took the electric work in

the temple. The incident took place on 17.12.2022 however,

CRL.A No. 561 of 2023

the complaint was lodged on 21.12.2022. Inspite of last four to

five months the appellants managed to escape and not

available for arrest or interrogation, the appellant is required

for custodial interrogation as the offences not only attract the

Section 326 of IPC but common intention to commit/assault on

the complainant with deadly weapons i.e., hammer and iron

rod. It is clear case that all the offences not only falls under

Section 326 of IPC, but also the Special Act, since there is

eyewitness apart from the complainant. Therefore, the trial

Court has rightly rejected the bail application of the appellant.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 are still absconding and there is every

possibility of tampering the witness.

In view of the above, appeal filed by the accused No.1 is

dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

RKA