Karnataka High Court
Ningappa vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 5 August, 2024
Author: K Natarajan
Bench: K Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
CRL.A No. 200092 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200092 OF 2024 (U/S 14 (A))
BETWEEN:
NINGAPPA
S/O MALLESHI SINDAGI,
AGE: 34 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O HIRE MASALI,
TQ. INDI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA
UDAGI 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: High THROUGH, POLICE INDI RURAL P.S.
Court Of Karnataka
DIST. VIJAYAPURA,
REPRESENTED BY
ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585107.
2. SHASHIKUMAR
S/O HANAMANT GUNNAPUR,
AGE: 31 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O HIREMASALI,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
CRL.A No. 200092 of 2024
TQ. INDI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. MANJULA MUNAVALI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 14-A OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 15-11-2023 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. 1717/2023 BY II
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE VIJAYAPURA, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. II) THAT, FOR THE
REASONS STATED ABOVE AMONGST OTHERS, IT IS HUMBLY
PRAYED THAT, THE HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO GRANT
THE REGULAR BAIL TO THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO. 2 IN
SPL. CASE (SC/ST) NO. 43/2023 (IN INDI RURAL PS FIR
(CRIME) NO. 93/2023 DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA) PENDING ON
THE FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPECIAL
JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC.
341, 324, 326, 307, 504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND
SEC.3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(VA) OF SC/ST PA NEW ACT 2015, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
CRL.A No. 200092 of 2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN)
This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused No.2
under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for
short, hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST (POA) Act')
seeking to set aside the order dated 15.11.2023 passed by
II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura, in
Criminal Miscellaneous No.1717/2023 rejecting to grant of
regular bail to the appellant and seeking to grant bail in
Spl.Case (SC/ST) No.43/2023 in FIR (Crime) No.93/2023
registered by Indi Rural Police Station, Vijayapura District,
for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326,
307, 504 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section
3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) New Act, 2015.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State
and the learned counsel for respondent No.2/de-facto
complainant.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the
complaint of respondent No.2, the police have registered
FIR on 18.07.2023 wherein it is alleged that on
14.07.2023 he has received information from one
Mahendra s/o Bheemashya Lookur that on the said day
himself, father of the complainant and uncle of the
complainant went to a Dhaba for have food, where
accused Nos.1 and 2 also came there and sat on the other
side of the table. The supplier said to be supplied food. At
that time, accused persons picked up quarrel stating that
why these people who belong to SC/ST caste came to the
Dhaba for eating food and they abused them in filthy
language. The appellant said to be held the father of the
complainant and accused No.1 said to be assaulted on the
head with soda bottle and caused injuries. They have also
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
assaulted Udaykumar the uncle of the complainant.
Immediately the injured was shifted to Sindagi Hospital,
thereafter they shifted to Vijayapura Hospital and
information sent to the police station, in turn the police
take complaint from the complainant and registered the
FIR. This appellant was arrested on 10.08.2023. Accused
No.1 also arrested on 29.07.2023. They have been
remanded in judicial custody. The present appellant is
accused No.2, who was moved bail application before the
Special Court, which came to be rejected. Hence, the
appellant is before this Court
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has
contended that the appellant is in judicial custody for more
than one year. There is a delay of four days in lodging the
complaint, where incident was took place on 14.07.2023,
but the complaint was registered on 18.07.2023. The
statement of witnesses recorded on 29.07.2023. There is
inordinate delay in recording the statements and the
evidences already commenced and witnesses are not
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
coming to the Court, warrant has been issued, the Special
Public Prosecutor himself obtained time for leading the
evidence, such being the case appellant in custody will not
survive any purpose. Hence, prayed for setting aside the
order.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2
filed objections and seriously objected appeal and
contending that the present appellant's mother was Vice
President of Gram Panchayat, she is influencing the
witnesses, threatening the witnesses and tampering the
witnesses and tried for the compromise on the ground of
paying money or whatever they want. Due to fear, the
witnesses and the injured family already shifted to
Vijayapura and unable to come to the Court. In this
regard, a complaint also filed against the mother of the
accused. But, the police have not taken any action and
they are very politically influential persons. If the
accused/appellant enlarged on bail, he may threaten or
tamper the prosecution witnesses and they commit similar
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
offence also. First of all they are socially backward people,
they have been assaulted for taking food in the hotel. Now
if accused is enlarged on bail, they definitely influenced
and threatened all witnesses and the matter ended in
acquittal. The injured still under coma stage. He is unable
to speak and unable to do his personal work and he is
almost like dead person. When such being the case
granting bail in this case does not arise. The offence is
heinous one both 326 and 307 as well as special Act.
Therefore, prayed to reject the appeal.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader also seriously objects the appeal and contending
that the witnesses were threatened by the accused
persons and their family members. Therefore, the trial not
yet concluded. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having heard arguments and perused the
records, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
"Whether the order of the Trial Court calls
for interference and the appellant is entitled for
bail as prayed for?"
8. On perusal of the records, the FIR and
complaint, which reveals of course complainant was not an
eyewitness, who is son of injured, but he came to
knowledge of the incident only through his uncle who
accompanied his father to the hotel on 14.07.2023. Of
course there is delay of four days in filing the complaint
where the police have said to be visited the hospital and
waited for recording the statement of injured, but he was
not in a position to give statement as he was suffering
from injury and unable to speak. Therefore, the police
have taken statement of the son and registered the FIR.
Therefore, that delay of recording the statement and
registering the FIR for four days cannot be considered as
inordinate delay in this matter. The accused No.1
assaulted on the head with the soda bottle. The bail
application of accused No.1 already rejected by this Court
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
on 21.11.2023 in Crl.A.No.200274/2023 and this appellant
is accused No.2. His contention is he has only caught hold
the injured and therefore, there is no overt acts against
him.
9. On perusal of records the statement of the
another injured witness, who is also eyewitness-CW.2 and
CW.4 and CW.12 all reveals that the accused Nos.1 and 2
were came to the hotel for having food and after seeing
them, the accused persons picked up quarrel stating that
why these people who belongs to the SC/ST community
came to Dhaba for eating food and abused them in filthy
language and how can they come and sit in hotel to take
food as hotel is meant for only higher caste people. On
that background, the accused persons picked up quarrel
and assaulted and caused injured. The injury sustained by
the injured are very in grievous in nature it attracts 326
and also they have assaulted and attempted to commit
murder which attracts 307 of IPC. The injured is still not
able to give his statement as he was almost become
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
vegetable and unable to understand the things and injury
which caused where he was unable to speak and
understand the things. Such being the case the injuries
nothing but serious injury and the injured was still in semi
coma/partly unconscious stage and without assistance of
any person he cannot move and attend his nature's at all.
10. Apart from that it is alleged by the respondent
counsel and produce various documents, which reveals the
mother of this appellant was a Vice President of village
panchayat and she was influencing the witnesses and
trying for compromise by taking the elders persons in the
village and threatening for coming to compromise
otherwise they will tamper all the witnesses. A complaint
also lodged by the witnesses CW.1 on 04.07.2024, the
police Superintendent of Police received complaint and not
taken any action against the mother of the appellant and
also not chosen to give any protection to the witnesses.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
11. The order sheet reveals that the Trial Court
already issued summons, trial was fixed from 27.05.2024
to 29.05.2024. The witnesses were served but they
remained absent. By that time, accused No.1 filed
application and medical certificate stating that accused
No.1 was under treatment and subsequently witnesses
CW.18 was present and he was bind over and the CW.19
and CW.20 were also served but they remained absent
and again summons were reissued on 24.06.2024 and
date was fixed on 24.07.2024. Again on 24.07.2024 notice
was not served and summons were reissued to CWs.2 and
3 to be present on 31.08.2024.
12. The learned counsel for the respondent has
vehemently contended that the witnesses were threatened
by the appellant's mother and by taking advantage of her
official power as village panchayath Vice President,
tampering the witnesses, threatening the other witnesses
not to give evidence/information about victim's family.
Therefore, the injured family was already totally shifted to
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
Vijayapura and hiding themselves, which reveals the
witnesses have been fear over the accused persons and
his mother. Inspite of giving complaint about one month
back, the Superintendent of Police, Vijayapura not taken
any action either for registering FIR or complaint against
the mother of the accused/appellant and also not chosen
to give any protection to the witnesses.
13. Considering all these aspects, I of the view that
not only offences are very serious in nature, injured is not
recovered from the injury and offence is very serious other
than the 307 and 326 of IPC, they also insulted the
member of the SC/ST. Therefore, it cannot be taken as
lightly as this accused is held the injured and not assaulted
or share the common intention with accused No.1.
Therefore, by considering all these aspects, the Trial Court
rightly dismissed the application for granting bail.
14. Considering all the facts and circumstances of
the case, order of the Trial Court is sound reasons for
rejecting the application. Therefore, order under appeal is
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
not interfered and the appellant is not entitled for bail.
Accordingly, the above point is answered in the Negative.
15. In view of the observation the appeal filed by
the appellant deserves to be dismissed.
However, it is very much necessary of this Court to
issue direction to Superintendent of Police, Vijayapura to
give protection to the witnesses and give proper security
for appearance of witnesses before the Court.
The Trial Court also issue fresh summons to the
witnesses and fix the trial on day-to-day basis by following
the Chapter-XVIII of the earlier old Cr.P.C. and new BNSS
and conclude trial without getting delay.
The Trial Court should ensure protection to the
witnesses.
If required the accused shall be kept in the judicial
custody and through video conferencing they shall produce
before the Court for recording the evidence and even if the
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5645
witnesses unable to come to the Court physically their
evidence also record through video conferencing.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
The office is directed to intimate a copy of the order
to Special Court as well as Superintendent of Police,
Vijayapura for giving protection and submit report to this
Court, failing which, serious view will be taken against the
concerned officials.
Sd/-
(K NATARAJAN)
JUDGE
SDU
CT:SI
