Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 436 (KAR)

Pavan v. State

2014-04-02

BUDIHAL R.B.

body2014
ORDER Budihal R.B., J. 1. This petition is filed by petitioners/accused 2, 3, 6 and 7 respectively under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 504 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 21 of 2014. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 3-2-2014 at about 8.30 a.m. complainant boarded the bus at Chandagalu Village in order to go to college. Complainant and his friends Girish, Shivakumar and Ganesh alighted at city bus stand and at that time, Girish had gone to toilet and others were waiting outside. When the said Girish came outside the toilet, blood was oozing and on enquiry, he told the first petitioner, Bharath, Sanjay and Karthik assaulted him and then they have taken him to the Devaraja Police Station and informed the police and police directed to take him to the K.R. Hospital for treatment. When said Girish was taking treatment the complainant was standing outside, at that time, petitioner and other accused persons came there and abused him in filthy language and assaulted him with legs and hands. Complainant being afraid ran away towards K.T. Street and then accused shouted as thief and the public suspected him as thief and assaulted him with hands, legs and stones. He became unconscious. Due to previous ill-will, petitioners and other accused persons have humiliated him by taking the name of his caste. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioners for the alleged offences. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition and other materials placed on record. 4. Since it is the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, the Court has to examine whether the alleged offence under the provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is committed or not. 3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition and other materials placed on record. 4. Since it is the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, the Court has to examine whether the alleged offence under the provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is committed or not. Looking to the averments made in the complaint, it is seen that except the words that the petitioners have also abused the complainant by taking the name of his caste and there are no specific allegations regarding the abusive words used to abuse him and also the details are not narrated in the complaint as to who has abused. Therefore, only on the basis of bald and vague allegations made in the complaint that the petitioners abused him by taking the name of the caste, it cannot be said that prima facie the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act will also be attracted. Therefore, the bar under Section 18 of the said Act will not come in the way to entertain the petition for grant of anticipatory bail. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that earlier the petitioners had filed complaint against the complainant and his supporters, which was registered before the registration of the present complaint for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. I have perused the said FIR and complaint dated 3-2-2014. It is the submitted that as a counter blast the complainant has subsequently filed the complaint against the present petitioners. The materials placed on record goes to show that there are cases and counter cases on both sides. The offences alleged are all triable by the Magistrate Court and not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life except the offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Therefore, looking to the materials on record and also in view of the fact that complaint is filed by the petitioners at the earliest point of time against complainant and his supporters, the petitioners are entitled to be granted with anticipatory bail. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Therefore, looking to the materials on record and also in view of the fact that complaint is filed by the petitioners at the earliest point of time against complainant and his supporters, the petitioners are entitled to be granted with anticipatory bail. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 504 read with Section 149 of IPC and also under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 21 of 2014, subject to the following conditions: (i) Each petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 25,000/-and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. (ii) They shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. (iii) They shall make themselves available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for. (iv) They shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute personal bond and also surety bond.