Karnataka High Court
Mr. S. Raju vs State Of Karnataka on 6 November, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
CRL.A No. 1716 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1716 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
MR. S. RAJU
S/O LATE SHEKHARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
WORKING AS GRAMA PANCHAYATH MEMBER,
R/A HEBBALI AND AGRICULTURIST,
ARECANUT GARDEN, NAGARAKATTE,
KASABA HOBLI, HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577527.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BHASKAR C R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI BY HOSADURGA POLICE, CHITRADURGA,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF REP THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
KARNATAKA
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SMT KAVITHA
W/O KRISHNAMURTHY M T,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/A RAMAJJANAHALLI VILLAGE,
VIJAYANAGARA BADAVANE,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
CRL.A No. 1716 of 2024
HOSADURGA TOWN,
CHITRADURGA - 577501.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN., HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST POA ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2024
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.966/2024 PASSED BY THE HONBLE
2ND ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CHITRADURGA
AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS UNDER SEC.352 OF BNS AND
SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT ON THE FILE OF THE
HONBLE SPL.,II ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
CHITRADURGA REGSITERED BY THE HOSADURGA P.S.AND
ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the sole accused praying to set
aside the order dated 05.08.2024 passed in Criminal
Miscellaneous No.966/2024, by the Special, 2nd Addl.
District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, whereunder
anticipatory bail petition of this appellant in respect of
Hosadurga Police Station in Crime No.312/2024 registered
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
for the offences punishable under Section 352 of BNS and
Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act came to be rejected.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Inspite of service
of notice, respondent No.2 has remained absent and
unrepresented.
3. The respondent No.2 has filed a complaint
against appellant stating that this appellant/accused has
given false information to her husband in order to create
suspicion on her and she had earlier filed complaint
against this appellant/accused and it is pending. She
stated that on 06.07.2021 in the evening
appellant/accused came near her house, took photograph
and sent the same to her husband's WhatsApp and made a
phone call to her husband stating that he has sent photo
of his wife, who is present with some other person and
told him that she is having some relation with other
person and created suspicion by her husband and also
abused touching her caste. The said, complaint came to be
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
registered in Crime No.312/2024 of Hosadurga Police
Station for the offences punishable under Section 352 of
BNS and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The
appellant/accused apprehending his arrest has filed
anticipatory bail petition and same came to be rejected by
the impugned order, which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would
contend that the averments of the complaint does not
attract the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST
(POA) Act and there is no specific word of abuse stated in
the complaint. The respondent No.2 has filed a false
complaint as this appellant/accused has issued notice
dated 19.06.2024 regarding maintenance of sufficient
balance for honouring cheque issued by her in a sum of
Rs.4,50,000/-. He further contend that the investigation is
completed and charge sheet is filed and therefore the
appellant is not required for further interrogation. With
this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant of
anticipatory bail to the appellant.
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader would
contend that the averments of the complaint states that
the appellant has abused touching the caste of the
respondent No.2 and it clearly attracts 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST
(POA) Act. As there is bar under Section 18 of SC/ST
(POA) Act, the learned Special Judge has rightly rejected
his anticipatory bail petition. With this, he prayed to
dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court
has perused the impugned order and other materials
placed on record.
7. Upon perusal of the averments of the
complaint, it is clear that there was a dispute between the
appellant and the respondent No.2 and respondent No.2
has filed a complaint against the appellant earlier and it is
pending. The documents produced by the learned counsel
for the appellant indicates that the appellant has issued
legal notice to respondent No.2 with regard to cheque
issued by her in a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- asking her to
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
maintain sufficient balance and the said notice has been
served on her. What are the abusive words used by the
appellant/accused has not been stated in the complaint.
Therefore at this stage, it cannot be said that there is
prima facie case to attract offences under Section
3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST(POA) Act and therefore bar under
Section 18 is not attracted. The other offences alleged
against the appellant is not punishable for death or
imprisonment for life. The charge sheet is already filed.
The appellant/accused has made out a case for setting
aside the impugned order and grant of anticipatory bail. In
the result, the following;
:ORDER:
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
05.08.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.966/2024
by the Special 2nd Addl. District and Sessions Judge,
Chitradurga is set aside. Consequently, the anticipatory
bail petition of the appellant/accused stands allowed and
he is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his
NC: 2024:KHC:44622
arrest in Crime No.312/2024 of Hosadurga Police Station,
subject to the following conditions:
(i) 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 Trial Court.
(ii) The appellant/accused shall voluntarily appear
before the jurisdictional Trial Court within 15 days
from today.
(iii) The appellant shall not threaten or tamper the
prosecution witness and shall appear before the Trial
Court on all the dates of hearing, unless exempted
and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
KLY
