Sri.Arun Kumar N.S vs State By Lingadahalli P.S
2023 Latest Caselaw 2634 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                       CRL.A No. 559 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 559 OF 2023
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SRI. ARUN KUMAR N.S.,
                         S/O SHEKARAPPA,
                         AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
                         OCC: DRIVER,

                   2.    SRI. HEMANTH N,
                         S/O NAGARAJ H.C.,
                         AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                         OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
                         BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF
                         NANDI VILLAGE, LINGADAHALLI HOBLI,
                         TARIKERE TALUK,
                         CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 228.
                                                               ...APPELLANTS
Digitally signed
by SUCHITRA        (BY SRI. KUMAR S J., ADVOCATE)
MJ
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   AND:

                   1.    STATE BY LINGADAHALLI P.S.,
                         REPRESENTED BY THE
                         STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                         HON'BLE HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
                         BENGALURU - 560 001.

                   2.    SRI. HARISH,
                         S/O CHANDRAPPA,
                               -2-
                                           CRL.A No. 559 of 2023




       AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

3.     SRI. CHANDRAPPA,
       S/O BASAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

       RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE
       RESIDENT OF NANDI VILLAGE,
       LINGADAHALLI HOBLI,
       TARIKERE TALUK,
       CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 228.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.J.ROHITH, HCGP FOR R1;
    R2 AND R3 SERVED)



        THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2023
PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE,       CHIKKAMAGALURU      IN    CRL.MISC.NO.47/2023.    b)
ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE
EVENT     OF    THEIR   ARREST    IN    CR.NO.3/2023     BY   THE
LINGADAHALLI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 324,
504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT PENDING ON THE
FILE    OF   ADDITIONAL   DISTRICT      AND   SESSIONS    JUDGE,
CHIKKAMAGALURU AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COST.

        THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   -3-
                                           CRL.A No. 559 of 2023




                             JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellants-accused Nos.1 and 2

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 District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru

(for short 'trial Court') in Crl.Misc.No.47/2023.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

appellants, learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent No.1-State. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are served

but unrepresented.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint

was filed by Sri. Harish i.e., respondent No.2 herein before the

Lingadhahalli police on 10.01.2023 alleging that on 08.01.2023

his father-respondent No.3 went for grazing the buffaloes and

in the evening one Rekha came and informed him that his

father was lying near the land of the appellants and has

sustained injuries. Immediately, he rushed to the spot along

with his nephew. On enquiry, respondent No.3 informed

CRL.A No. 559 of 2023

respondent No.2 that when he was grazing buffaloes, the

accused persons picked up quarrel and assaulted him with club

and stone and caused injuries and also abused him in a filthy

language by taking the name of his caste. Then respondent

No.3 was shifted to the Hospital by respondent No.2 and then

information was given to the police, police came to the Hospital

and tried to record the statement of the victim but he was not

in a position to give statement. Therefore, respondent No.2

lodged the complaint against the appellants with the police.

The police registered the FIR against the appellants for the

non-bailable offences, which is punishable under Sections 324,

504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections

3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. Hence, the

appellants approached the trial Court for granting anticipatory

bail. The trial Court vide impugned order dated 30.01.2023

dismissed the application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

Hence, the appellants are before this Court by way of appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that

the appellants are innocent and have not committed the alleged

offences. They have not assaulted the victim. There is a delay

of two days in lodging the complaint. Respondent No.3 grazed

CRL.A No. 559 of 2023

the buffaloes in the jowar crop grown in the land of the

appellants, which was questioned by the appellants. Therefore,

they have filed false complaint with police. 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 victim-respondent No.3

clearly shows that there is prima-facie material against the

appellants for having committed the offence and assaulted the

victim by club and stone. The injured has sustained fracture to

his left hand and leg, which is grievous in nature and attracts

Section 326 of IPC. The appellants are absconding for last five

months and are required for custodial interrogation. The trial

Court after considering the materials on record, rightly rejected

the anticipatory bail applications. Hence, he prays for dismissal

of the appeal.

6. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the

records, which reveals that respondent No.3 was the victim

who said to have took the buffaloes and left it for grazing near

the land of the appellants, for which, they have objected and at

that time, the quarrel took place between respondent No.3 and

CRL.A No. 559 of 2023

appellants. It is stated that the appellants have assaulted

respondent No.3 with stone and club. Due to which, respondent

No.3 sustained injuries. It is also stated that the appellants

have abused respondent No.3 in a filthy language by taking the

name of his caste. Though the place of occurrence of alleged

incident is a land, a public view, there is no other witnesses

present at the time of abusing the injured by the accused in

order to show that the appellants were insulting/abusing the

victim by taking the name of his caste within a public view in

order to prove the offence under Section 3(1) of the SC/ST

(POA) Act. The remaining IPC offences under Section 326 have

been registered due to the injuries sustained by the victim were

grievous in nature. The injured is out of danger and except his

statement, there are no other eye-witnesses to the incident,

which took place in public view and there is no circumstantial

evidence produced against appellants. Therefore, considering

the same, I am of the view that the trial Court was not right in

rejecting the application filed seeking anticipatory bail as there

is no offence under Section 3(1) of the SC/ST (POA) Act is

made out in order to show that the appellants abused the

injured within public view. Therefore, without expressing any

CRL.A No. 559 of 2023

opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the trial

Court erred in dismissing the anticipatory bail application filed

by the appellants. Accordingly, the order of the trial Court

passed in Crl.Misc.No.47/2023 dated 30.01.2023 is hereby set

aside. Appeal filed by the appellants under Section 14-A(2) of

the SC/ST (POA) Act, is allowed.

The respondent - Police is directed to release the

appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in the event of their

arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r),

3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, registered by the

respondent - Police Station in Crime No.3/2023, subject to the

following conditions:

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

(ii) Appellants shall make themselves available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for;

CRL.A No. 559 of 2023

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

(iv) Appellants shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

(v) Appellants shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

(vi) Appellants are deemed to be in custody for the purpose of any recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

(vii) Appellants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer and appear before him once in a week on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. for a period of two months or till filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier.

(viii) If in case, the appellants violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

JUDGE SMJ