Karnataka High Court
Sunil vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 7 February, 2024
Author: Rajendra Badamikar
Bench: Rajendra Badamikar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
CRL.A No. 200350 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200350 OF 2023 (U/S 14 (A))
BETWEEN:
SRI SUNIL S/O SHIVASHARANAPPA NAYKODI
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O HARKANCHI VILLAGE,
TQ. KAMALAPUR,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by SHILPA R 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH
TENIHALLI SHO., MAHAGAON POLICE STATION,
Location: HIGH TQ. KAMALAPUR, DIST. KALABURAGI,
COURT OF REPT. BY ITS ADDL. SPP,
KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BENCH,
KALABURAGI-585102.
2. SMT. KASHIBAI W/O JAGADEVAPPA KOTNOOR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O HARKANCHI VILLAGE,
TQ. KAMALAPUR,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585417.
...RESPONDENTS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
CRL.A No. 200350 of 2023
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (PA)
ACT, PRYING TO SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
01.12.2023, IN CRL.MISC.NO.1967/2023, (ARISING OUT OF
FIR NO.74/2023) PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI BY ALLOWING THIS
APPEAL. CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED
NO.3 ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.103/2023 (FIR NO.74/2023)
PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 114,
302, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506, R/W SEC. 149 OF INDIAN
PENAL CODE AND SEC. 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST
(PA) ACT, 1989, REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT
MAHAGAON P.S.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section 14(A) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC ST Act' challenging the
order in Crl.Misc.No.1967/2023 whereby the learned
Special Judge has rejected the bail petition filed by the
appellant/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are
as under:
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
The allegations of the prosecution disclose that on
27.10.2023, at 0.45 hrs, the complainant's deceased
husband Jagadevappa and his friends Ajay and
Khamaruddin were sitting in front of Hanuman Temple
situated in Harkanchi Village of Kamalapur Taluka in
Kalaburagi District. It is further alleged that accused Nos.1
to 7 came there under intoxicated state of mind and
accused No.1 abused deceased in filthy language with
reference to his caste. When the complainant's deceased
husband objected for the same and informed him that he
will inform the same to his parents and proceeded towards
the house of accused No.1, the petitioners along with
other accused followed him and at 1.00 a.m., he was
wrongfully restrained and he was assaulted by iron rod,
clubs on the head and when he collapsed, the petitioner
herein has also assaulted him. It is alleged that some of
the accused instigated them and when Khamaruddin tried
to rescue him, accused No.1 attempted to assault him by
iron rod and accused No.2 assaulted on his left shoulder
with club. The deceased Jagadevappa sustained fatal
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
injuries and he was shifted to Government Hospital,
Kalaburagi and as he was not in a position to give
statement, his wife i.e., the complainant lodged a
complaint which was registered in Crime No.103/2022 of
Mahagoan Police Station for the offences punishable under
Section 143, 147, 148, 114, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506
r/w Section 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)
of the SC ST Act. Meanwhile, appellant was arrested and it
is also evident that subsequently, injured Jagadevappa
succumbed in the hospital because of the injuries
sustained by him. A requisition was filed for incorporating
the offence under Section 302 of IPC. The bail petition
filed by the appellant was rejected by the learned Sessions
Judge and hence, the appellant is before this Court.
3. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned
counsel for appellant and the learned HCGP. Perused the
records.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would
contend that the allegations made in the complaint clearly
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
discloses that the appellant has assaulted the deceased
only by hands and the main allegations were directed
against accused Nos.1 and 2. Hence, he would contend
that no over tact inviting the offence under Section 302 of
IPC is attributed against him and hence he would seek for
admitting the petition of bail. He would contend that
appellant is in custody since 20.07.2023 and his presence
is no more required by the investigating officer.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader contends that the allegations establishes that the
appellant, who is arrayed as accused No.3 was present all
along with accused Nos.1 and 2 and other accused in both
the fights, wherein initially abusive words were used with
reference to the caste and subsequently the deceased was
chased by the appellant and other accused. He would
contend that the assault by the iron rod and stick is
alleged against accused Nos.1 and 2. The allegation
discloses that the appellant has also assaulted by stick and
when the deceased fell on the ground, he has assaulted
him by hands and he being a part of the unlawful
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
assembly, the act of each member of the unlawful
assembly is required to be attributed to the appellant also.
Hence, he would contend that appellant actively
participated in the commission of this offence and in case
he is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility he
tampering the prosecution witness and jumping on bail.
Hence, he would seek for rejection of the bail petition.
6. The allegations of the prosecution discloses that
on 27.10.2023 at about 0:45 hours, the deceased and his
friend Ajay as well as Kamaruddin were sitting near the
Hanuman Temple in Harkanchi village after attending
Mabusubani fair. Then accused No.1 and other accused
along with appellant abused him with reference to his
caste. It is further alleged that the deceased objected for
the same and told him that he is going to report it to his
parents. When he was proceeding, the appellant along
with other accused chased him and when deceased was
running they all chased him and accused Nos.1 and 2
assaulted him by iron rod and stick on his head. The
allegation further discloses that when the deceased
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
collapsed the present appellant also assaulted him by
hands. The allegations are against accused Nos.1 to 7 and
the present appellant was a part of the unlawful assembly.
Though it is argued that the incident occurred in a spur of
moment, but the said contention cannot be accepted, as
the appellant and other accused chased the deceased and
admittedly he did not raise any fight, but only he told
accused No.1 that he is going to report his abuse to
parents of the accused No.1. That clearly discloses that
there was a mens rea on the part of the accused and the
appellant being part of the unlawful assembly, is
answerable to the act of the other accused also. It is
further stated by the learned High Court Government
Pleader that the investigation is concluded and charge
sheet is also laid down. There is prima facie evidence as
against present appellant and further specific overt act is
alleged against the present appellant. Looking to these
facts and circumstances and considering the nature of the
offence, since the deceased succumbed due to injuries,
this is not a fit case wherein discretion can be exercised in
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1362
favour of the appellant. Hence, the appeal being devoid of
any merits, does not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, it stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DS,NJ
