Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1378 (KAR)

Laxman v. State of Karnataka

2022-10-18

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

body2022
JUDGMENT Shivashankar Amarannavar, J. - This appeal has been filed by accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 challenging the order dated 15.09.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 531/2022 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote, whereunder the anticipatory bail petition of the appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 in respect of Crime No. 154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for brevity) and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'SC & ST (POA) Act', for brevity), came to be rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No. 1/State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No. 2 remained absent and unrepresented. 3. The case of the prosecution is that, respondent No. 2 has filed the complaint stating that he is resident of Bodnayakandinni village of Bagalkote Taluk, that on 04.09.2022 at about 6.00 p.m. near bus stand on 5th day immersion of Ganesh idol a pooja was offered and auction of Ganesh pooja items like fruits etc., was conducted in which respondent No. 2 has participated. At that time accused No. 1 abused him in filthy language, on questioning by the respondent No. 2 again accused No. 1 abused him taking his caste. It is further stated that on 05.09.2022 accused No. 1 called the father of respondent No. 2 to his house and asked him to advise his son and also abused and threatened to his father. When he is ready to go to Bagalkote at that time his father came and informed him that accused No. 1 asked him to advise him and also threatened him, by that time all other accused came there and caught hold respondent No. 2 and assaulted and abused him in filthy language touching his caste. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No. 154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA) Act. Accused Nos. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No. 154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA) Act. Accused Nos. 1 to 7 apprehending their arrest filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 531/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote by order dated 15.09.2022. Therefore, appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 have challenged the said order in the instant appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants /accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 would contend that there are no specific allegations against these appellants to attract the offences alleged against them. It is his further submission that the allegations made against these appellants are omnibus allegations. There are no specific overt acts against each of the appellants in the complaint. Accused No. 1 has also filed the complaint against the complainant and it is registered in Crime No. 155/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. It is his further submission that as no prima facie case is made out for the offence punishable under Section 3 of SC and ST (POA) Act, the bar contained under Section 18 of SC and ST (POA) Act is not attracted. It is his further submission that without considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions/Special Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that the investigation is still in progress. The alleged incident occurred near bus stand which is a public place. The appellants abused the complainant touching his caste, assaulted him with hands and legs and caused injuries. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of eyewitnesses. Considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions/Special Judge has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition of these appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 which does not call for any interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. 6. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of eyewitnesses. Considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions/Special Judge has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition of these appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 which does not call for any interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No. 1-State, this Court has gone through the averments of the complaint, FIR and the impugned order. 7. The accusation against these appellants and another accused in the complaint is that, on 05.09.2022 when the father of the complainant came near bus stand to intimate what had happen in the house of accused No. 1, at that time accused Nos. 1 to 7 came there and started quarrelling with the complainant. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have abused the complainant in filthy language, held his shirt and assaulted him with hands. At that time accused Nos. 1 and 3 held him tightly and accused Nos. 2 and 6 assaulted him with stone on his head, left year and caused bleeding injuries. At that time accused Nos. 4 and 5 have assaulted him with hands and kicked him and stamped with legs by wearing chappal and abused him taking his caste. At that time, accused Nos. 6 and 7 have assaulted him with hands and also all the accused assaulted the persons who came to rescue him. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 alleged to have together abused the complainant in filthy language. It is also alleged that accused Nos. 4 and 5 together abused the complainant taking his caste. What are the words of abuse by accused Nos. 4 and 5 have not been stated in the complaint. It is also not stated that among accused Nos. 4 and 5 which accused used which abusive words to the complainant. The abuse alleged to have been made by accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 is omnibus allegation therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 together used the same words at the same time. Therefore at this stage, there is no prima facie case against appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA) Act. 1, 2 and 3 is omnibus allegation therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 together used the same words at the same time. Therefore at this stage, there is no prima facie case against appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST (POA) Act. When there is no prima facie case, the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be entertained as the bar under Section 18 of SC and ST (POA) Act is not attracted. Without considering all these aspects, learned Sessions/Special Court has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. The other offences alleged against the appellants are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The appellants have undertaken to co-operate with the Police in investigation. The main apprehension of the prosecution is that if the appellants are granted anticipatory bail, they will hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for setting aside the impugned order and granting anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.09.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 531/2022 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote is set aside so far as these appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are concerned. Consequently, appellants/accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 154/2022 of Bagalkote Rural Police Station, subject to the following conditions: i. The appellants shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer. ii. The appellants shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety. iii. The appellants shall attend the Police Station concerned every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 06:00 p.m. and mark their presence for a period of two months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. iv. The appellants shall co-operate with the investigating officer and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required. iii. The appellants shall attend the Police Station concerned every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 06:00 p.m. and mark their presence for a period of two months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. iv. The appellants shall co-operate with the investigating officer and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required. v. The appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. vi. The appellants shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.