Karnataka High Court
Sri Mohan Shetty Paniyal vs Sri Bhaskar Naika on 29 November, 2023
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
CRL.A No. 1844 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1844 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MOHAN SHETTY PANIYAL
S/O LATE VITTAL SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.3-45/8,
SRIKRISHNA, NEAR ANUGRAHA SCHOOL,
UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 240.
2. SRI MUKESH SHETTY,
S/O LATE VITTAL SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
Digitally signed RESIDING AT:
by GAYATHRI NANDA GOKULA,
PG
KANAJU, PANIYAL,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF UJIRE POST,
KARNATAKA BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 240.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVASA. D. C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. BHASKAR NAIKA
S/O BABU NAIKA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
CRL.A No. 1844 of 2023
RESIDING AT:
BADEKOTTU HOUSE,
UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 240.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BELTHANGADY POLICE,
REPRESENTED BY
THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SOWMYA. R., HCGP FOR R2;
R1 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2)OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE II ADDL.DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT D.K., MANGALURU IN
CRL.MISC.NO.826/2023 DATED 27.09.2023 AND FURTHER
ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 ON
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 BELTHANGADY POLICE IN RESPECT OF THE
CR.NO.82/2023 UNDER SEC.143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 354,
324, 504, 506, 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
CRL.A No. 1844 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by accused Nos.2 and 3 in
crime No.82/2023 of Belthangadi Police Station registered
for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148,
341, 342, 354, 324, 504, 506, 149 of IPC and under
Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act 2015,
2. Heard the learned counsel for appellants and
the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State
and perused the material on record.
3. Respondent No.1 / defacto complainant is
served but unrepresented.
4. In the complaint lodged by respondent No.1 it
is averred that on 02.09.2023 at about 04:45 p.m. he
returned to Ujire from Mangaluru, after giving an interview
to a youtube channel. At about 05:00 p.m., after dropping
one Umesh shetty, while he was returning to his house in
Badekottu, accused Nos.1 to 6 and others came in a car
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
and stopped him. All of them abused him in filthy
language referring to his caste and tied him to an electric
pole and assaulted him with stones on his back, chest,
face etc. When he started screaming, his wife rushed to
the spot, but she was also assaulted by accused No.6 with
stones. Hearing the commotion, Jayaprakash shetty,
Shankar Shetty, Thimarodi and Suresh Naik and others
came to the spot, at that time, all the accused fled away
threatening him and throwing the stones at the spot. It is
alleged in the complaint that the accused persons
committed the offence since the complainant had given an
interview to a T.V. channel.
5. The learned Sessions Judge vide order dated
27.09.2023 in Crl.Misc. No.826/2023 has dismissed the
petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the
appellants are before this Court.
6. It is pertinent to see that, in the FIR,
allegations are made against accused Nos.1 to 6 and
others. However, during investigation it was revealed that
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
accused Nos.1, 4 and 6 were not at all present at the spot
and they have not committed any offence. It is therefore
contended by the learned counsel for appellants that the
entire allegations are false and the appellants are
implicated in this case on account of previous ill will and
due to some previous incident. He submits that after
lodging of the complaint, the Police issued notice under
Section 41(A) of Cr.P.C and these appellants have
appeared before the Police and co-operated with the
investigation.
7. The learned High Court Government Pleader
has contended that there are two injured in this case and
the injury sustained by the complainant is grievous in
nature and therefore, she contends that there is a
prima-facie case against the appellants.
8. Omnibus allegations are made in the First
Information Report that all the accused came in a car and
wrongfully restrained the complainant, abused him
referring to his caste, assaulted etc. In the further
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
statement, complainant has stated that accused Nos.1, 4
and 6 were not present, which raises a doubt about the
veracity of the allegations made against them. It is not the
case of prosecution that on the ground that the
complainant is a member of Scheduled caste or Scheduled
tribe, the offence was committed. On the other hand, it is
alleged that since the complainant had given some
interview to a TV channel, the accused have committed
the offence. Since it was revealed during investigation
that, some of the accused were not at all present at the
spot when the alleged incidence took place and in view of
the omnibus allegations made against all the accused, a
reasonable doubt arises in the mind of the Court about the
allegations made against the appellants.
9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
appellants that accused No.5, after his arrest was
produced before the Court on 14.09.2023 and considering
the facts and circumstances, the learned Special Judge
NC: 2023:KHC:43146
enlarged him on interim bail on the same day imposing
conditions.
10. In the above facts and circumstances and
considering the relief granted to accused No.5,
the appellants / accused Nos.2 and 3 are directed to
appear before the Jurisdictional Court on or before
11.12.2023 and they are permitted to file necessary
application seeking bail and in that event the learned
Sessions Judge shall consider their application and enlarge
them on bail on the same terms and conditions.
11. With the above observations the appeal is
disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LDC
