Karnataka High Court
N Tejasvi Reddy Alias Tejureddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 October, 2023
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1593 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
N TEJASVI REDDY ALIAS TEJUREDDY,
S/O NARASIMHA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT #11, CHINNAMARI LAYOUT,
HEBBAL,
BANGALORE - 560 024.
...APPELLANT
(BY MISS NIKHITHA N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH BY HEBBAL POLICE,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
BENGALURU.
2. SRI. MUNIKRISHNA M,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NO.565, INDIRA BLOCK,
HEBBAL,
BANGALORE - 560 024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. NANJEGOWDA C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.06.2023
BEFORE THE HONBLE LXX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE, BENGALURU AND DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.80/2023
REGISTERED BY HEBBAL P.S., PENDING BEFORE THE
ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT (SPL.COURT UNDER
SC/ST ACT) AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
3(1)(r)(s) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT AND UNDER
SEC.323,341,504,506 OF IPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The sole accused filed this appeal praying to set aside
the order dated 07.06.2023 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.4223/2023 by the LXX Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-71),
whereunder the anticipatory bail application of this
appellant/accused sought in respect of Crime No.80/2023
of Hebbala Police Station registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act,
1989 (in short "the Act") and Sections 323, 341, 504 and
506 of Indian Penal Code came to be rejected.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for
appellant/accused, learned High Court Government
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Learned counsel for
respondent No.1 did not appear to contest the appeal.
3. Respondent No.2 has filed a complaint on
02.05.2023 stating that he belongs to Adhi Karnataka
Caste which is coming under schedule caste and there
were quarrels between him and appellant/accused with
regard to caste abuse. With the same intention, on
30.04.2023 on Sunday in the morning 10.50A.M. when he
was near Rajlaxmi Wines at that time appellant/accused
stopped him and abused him in singular and made caste
abuse and gave life threat. On the basis of the said
complaint case came to be registered in Crime No.80 of
2023 of Hebbala Police Station for the aforesaid offences.
The appellant/accused apprehending his arrest filed
Crl.Misc.No.4223/2023 seeking anticipatory bail, the same
came to be rejected by the impugned order dated
07.06.2023, which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused would
contend that the very averments of the complaint reveal
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
that there is earlier quarrels between the
appellant/accused and respondent No.2. There is a delay
in filing the complaint. What are the words used by the
appellant/accused to abuse the complainant have not been
stated in the complaint. The averment made in the
complaint does not attract the offence under Section 3 of
the Act and therefore, bar under Section 18 and 18(A) of
the Act is not attracted. On that point she placed reliance
on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of the
Prathvi Raj Chauhan Vs Union of India and others
reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 159. Without considering
all these aspects the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge
has rejected the anticipatory bail petition of the
appellant/accused which requires interference by this
Court. With this, he prays to allow the appeal and grant
anticipatory bail to the appellant/accused.
5. Learned High Court Government would contend
that the averments of complaint will reveal that the
appellant/accused has made caste abuse and threatened
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
the complainant to take his life and it attracts offence
under Section 3 of the Act. Considering bar under Section
18 and 18A of the Act, the Session Judge has rightly
rejected the anticipatory bail petition of this
appellant/accused. With this he prayed for dismissal of
the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the
appellant/accused and learned High Court Government
Pleader, this Court has perused the impugned order and
averments of the complaint.
7. The averments of the complaint filed by the
respondent No.2 against the appellant/accused will reveal
there were earlier quarrels between him and
appellant/accused regarding the caste abuse. In the
complaint it is stated that "vÉÃdÄgÉrØ JA§ÄªÀgÀÄ £À£ÀߣÀÄß CqÀØUÀnÖ
KPÀªÀZÀ£ÀzÀ°è £À£ÀߣÀÄß ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀªÁV ¨ÉÊzÀÄ eÁw ¤AzÀ£É ªÀiÁr £À£Àß ªÉÄïÉ
KPÁªÀZÀ£À Cw ªÀiÁr. £À£ÀUÀÆ £À£Àß PÀÄlÄA§zÀªÀjUÀÆ fêÀ ¨ÉzÀjPÉ
ºÁQgÀÄvÁÛ£É". The said averment reveal that the
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
appellant/accused stopped the complainant and talked
with him in singular and made caste abuse. What are
words used for caste abuse has been not stated in the
complaint. Therefore, at this stage it cannot be said the
averment of the complaint attracts offence under Section 3
of the Act. Therefore, bar under Section 18 and 18A of
the Act is not attracted, in view of the same, decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Prathvi Raj
Chauhan Vs Union of India and others reported in
2020 SCC OnLine SC 159 (supra). Without considering
these aspects the learned Session Judge/Special Judge has
passed impugned order which requires interference by this
Court.
8. The appellant/accused has made out grounds
for setting aside the impugned order and grant of
anticipatory bail. In the result, following
ORDER
i) Appeal is allowed.
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
ii) The impugned order dated 07.06.2023 passed
in Crl.Misc.No.4223/2023 by the LXX
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and
Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-71) is set
aside. The anticipatory bail petition is allowed.
The appellant/accused is ordered to be
released on bail in Crime No.80/2023 Hebbala
Police Station, subject to following conditions:
a. 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
Investigation Officer;
b. The appellant/accused shall voluntarily
appear before the Investigation Officer
within 15 days from today and execute
bail bonds and furnish surety.
c. The appellant/accused shall cooperate with
the Investigation Officer in the
investigation.
NC: 2023:KHC:36806
CRL.A No. 1593 of 2023
d. The appellant/accused shall not threaten
the complainant and other prosecution
witnesses.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DSP
