JUDGMENT : B.A. Patil, J. 1. The petitioner/accused No.1 is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.24 of 2019 of Shirahatti Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 323, 504 R/w. Section 34 of the IPC and also Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also the learned HCGP for the respondent No.1-State. 3. The gist of the complaint is that, on 08.02.2019 at about 11.00 am, when the complainant's wife was going to their land, petitioner/accused No.1, who was standing in front of his finance shop called her and asked about repayment of Rs.500/- loan taken by them. The wife of the complainant informed that she will inform her husband and arrange to repay the amount. It is further alleged in the complaint that, the petitioner/accused further told the wife of the complainant that her husband is interfering in the land transaction between himself and one Devappa Fakirappa Kodli and even not permitting the petitioner to use the land for approaching his property. It is further alleged that, even though he had financed the complainant and his wife, they have not voted for him and they are not trustworthy and they have backstabbed him. In that light, on 09.02.2019 at about 9.00 pm, when the wife of the complainant informed about the incident which has been taken place on 08.02.2019, accused No.1 was called by the complainant and he did not reply. As such the complainant himself went to the office of the petitioner/accused and enquired about the statement made before his wife. At that time, the accused assaulted the complainant, insulted him and abused him by taking the name of the caste. It is further alleged that the accused No.2 was also present at that time and he also assaulted the complainant. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 that the offences alleged against the accused/petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is his further submission that the petitioner had contested for panchayath election and he had lost against one Manjunath. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 that the offences alleged against the accused/petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is his further submission that the petitioner had contested for panchayath election and he had lost against one Manjunath. It is his further submission that, on 09.02.2019 the complainant and others beated the petitioner and warned him to withdraw the petition filed before the Deputy Commissioner and as a result of the same, he filed the complaint in Crime No.23/2019 at about 5.30 pm. As a counter blast, the complainant filed the present complaint after five hours at about 10.30 pm on the same day. That itself clearly goes to show the malafides of the filing of the complaint. The petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.1. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently submitted that the accused/petitioner was dealing with the finance and on 08.02.2019, he called the wife of the complainant and asked her to repay an amount of Rs.500/- and when the complainant went for enquiry, at that time, the accused/petitioner abused him by taking his caste and also assaulted him. He further submitted that there is ample material against the accused and there is bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act to grant anticipatory bail. He further submitted that the accused/ petitioner is absconding and is not available for the purpose of investigation or interrogation. If he is released on bail again, he may abscond and he may not be available for trial. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. 7. On a close reading of the contents of the complaint and other material, it clearly goes to show that, when the complainant went to ask about the incident which has taken place on 08.02.2019, at that time, the accused insulted and abused him by taking the name of his caste. 7. On a close reading of the contents of the complaint and other material, it clearly goes to show that, when the complainant went to ask about the incident which has taken place on 08.02.2019, at that time, the accused insulted and abused him by taking the name of his caste. But the records and the grounds which have been mentioned in the petition clearly goes to show that, earlier a case has been registered against the complainant in Crime No.23/2019 at about 5.30 pm and the present complaint has been filed at about 10.30 pm. 8. It is well established proposition of law that, if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide, then under that circumstances, the Court can exercise power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to release the accused on anticipatory bail. This proposition of law has been laid down in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, (2018) 6 SCC 454 . 9. Keeping in view the above said proposition of law, if the entire material is perused, it clearly goes to show that only as a counter blast to the complaint in Crime No.23/2009, this case has been filed at about 10.30 pm in Crime No.24/2009. If the alleged incident has taken place at the time which has been stated in the complaint, definitely earlier to that complaint would have been registered. The offences which have been alleged against the accused/petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. In that light, the petitioner/accused No.1 has made out a case to release him on anticipatory bail. 10. Hence petition is allowed. Petitioner/Accused No. 1 is directed to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.24/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 323, 504 R/w. Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018, subject to the following conditions: i. He shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii. He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today. iii. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly. iv. ii. He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today. iii. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly. iv. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. v. He is directed to mark his attendance before the jurisdictional Police once in fifteen days till the charge sheet is filed.