Karnataka High Court
Veeresh And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 29 September, 2023
Bench: Venkatesh Naik T
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200270 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. VEERESH
S/O BASANNA @ BASAWARAJ MUGUTI,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE.
2. ROHINI
W/O RAVIKUMAR MUGUTI,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD.
3. NAGESH @ NAGAPPA
S/O BASANNA @ BASAWARAJ MUGUTI,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE.
4. RAVI @ RAVIKUMAR
Digitally signed S/O BASANNA @ BASAWARAJ MUGUTI,
by SHILPA R AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
TENIHALLI
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 5. SHARDABAI @ SARASWATI
W/O BASANNA @ BASAWARAJ MUGUTI,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD.
6. ERAMMA
W/O VEERESH MUGUTI,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD.
ALL ARE RESIDENT OF HONNAKIRANAGI,
TALUK AND DISTRICT KALABURAGI-585 106.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI B. C. JAKA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH FARHATABAD POLICE STATION,
DISTRICT KALABURAGI-585 106,
NEW REPRESENTED BY ADDL. S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585 107.
2. AMBAVVA
W/O BASAWARAJ HARALAYYA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
RESIDENT AT HONNAKIRANAGI,
TALUK AND DISTRICT KALABURAGI-585 106.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1, &
SRI SIDDHARTH M. RANE AND SRI SANTOSH PATIL,
ADVOCATES, FOR R-2)
***
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF
THE SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT-
FARHATABAD POLICE STATION TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTS ON
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME
NO.90/2023 REGISTERED BY FARHATABAD POLICE STATION FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504 AND 506 READ
WITH SECTION 149 OF THE IPC AND UNDER SECTION 3(i)(s) OF THE
SC/ST (POA) ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KALABURAGI.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
JUDGMENT
The appellants/accused Nos.1 to 6 have filed this
appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [for
short, 'SC/ST (POA) Act'] praying to set aside the order
dated 23-8-2023 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1400 of
2023 passed by II Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Kalaburagi, and further to direct the respondent-
Farhatabad Police Station to enlarge them on bail in the
event of their arrest in Crime No.90 of 2023 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 read
with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and
under Sections 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for
the appellants, the learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel
for respondent No.2-de facto complainant.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that,
on 8-7-2023 at about 9.45 a.m., when the complainant
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
was in her house situated at Honnakiranagi Village,
Kalaburagi, the appellants came there, abused her in filthy
language by taking up her caste name and made criminal
intimidation to eliminate her. Hence, she lodged the
complaint.
4. Apprehending arrest at the hands of the
respondent-Police, the appellants filed the petition before
the trial Court, which came to be rejected. Hence, this
appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended
that the appellants are innocent and they have not
committed any offence. Earlier, the appellants have
lodged a complaint against the complainant's family in
Crime No.71 of 2023 for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 504, 506 and 306 read with Section 149 of
the IPC and now, as a counter blast, the complainant has
filed this case. The appellants are ready to abide by the
conditions to be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed
for allowing the appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader has filed
the statement of objections and contended that there is a
prima-facie case against the appellants. Though there is
delay of 10 days in lodging the complaint, it is a matter of
trial. There is a Bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (POA)
Act and hence, the anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
Hence, she prayed for dismissing the appeal.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has
contended that in view of the ratio laid down in the case of
PRATHVI RAJ CHAUHAN v. UNION OF INDIA reported
in (2020) 4 SCC 727, the appellants are not entitled for
bail. Hence, he prayed for dismissing the appeal.
8. On perusal of the material available on record, it
appears that the incident took place on 8-7-2023 at
9.45 a.m., when the complainant was in her house
situated at Honnakiranagi Village, Kalaburagi, the
appellants came there, abused her in filthy language by
taking up her caste name and made criminal intimidation
to eliminate her, but she lodged the complaint on
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
18-7-2023 and hence, there is delay of 10 days in lodging
the complaint and the delay is not explained by the
complainant.
9. In the instant case, as per the case of the
prosecution, the appellants abused the complainant and
made criminal intimidation. Except this allegation, there
are no other allegations. Admittedly, appellant No.1
lodged the complaint in Crime No.71 of 2023 against the
complainant and her family members alleging that they
abetted his brother to commit suicide and now, as a
counter blast, the complainant filed this case.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
PRATHVI RAJ CHAUHAN v. UNION OF INDIA
reported in (2020) 4 SCC 727 has held that, if there is
no prima-facie material to attract the ingredients of the
SC/ST Act, pre-arrest can be granted. In the instant
case, at this juncture, no prima-facie material is made
out. Hence, the appellants are entitled for bail. Further,
looking into any angle, the trial Court has not properly
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
appreciated the material available on record and hence, it
requires interference. Hence, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
Criminal appeal is allowed. The respondent-Police
Station are directed to release the appellants/accused
Nos.1 to 6 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime
No.90 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, and under Sections 3(i)(s) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, subject to the following conditions:
i) Appellants shall execute a personal bond
in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each (Rupees
one lakh only) with a surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of Investigating
Officer/Station House Officer;
ii) Appellants shall surrender themselves
before the Investigating Officer/Station
House Officer within ten days from the
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7800
CRL.A No. 200270 of 2023
date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order;
iii) Appellants shall not tamper with the
prosecution witnesses directly or
indirectly;
iv) Appellants shall appear before the trial
Court on all dates of hearing;
v) Appellants shall mark their attendance
before the Investigating Officer/Station
House Officer on first Sunday of every
month between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
for a period of six months or till filing of
the charge-sheet, whichever is earlier,
and
vi) Appellants shall not indulge in any similar
offences.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KVK
