Karnataka High Court
Yallappa Hanamant Kolekar vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2010
INTTfi3HKHiCOURT(H7KARNATAKA(HRCUYTBENCH ATDHARWAD DATED THIS "mu :2" DAY OF JANUARY gs: _f BEFORE THE HON-BLE MR. JUSTICE CRL.P. N0. 79:5/2019*'-.: BETWEEN: 1. Sri.Yal1appa Hanama1i.t_E*i0l--ekgr,i " _ Age: 42 years, Oc-c: Agri.eullt~u§e.', R/0.Kakati, Tq:.& Dis,t~:v--Bef!g'au11i.l ' ' Sri.Narayan,..1i3.hatrernav _ .l Age: 61 yei2trs,:l"€_)ec':'----Ag'ri:eu'l'tu:re,'»., R/0 .1< altar; , jrfq; Di sews el gsa uni. S ri . 'Kala. pa Sonatti :Mlt1.chlan(ii, = _ .. Age:,3_8 yea"rs_, One: Agriculture, R/0..S,Qnatti, Belgaum. Srii:S,id..avra:i:'Sli'ddappa Halabar 'Age: 622, jy..ear,s-,_Occ: Agriculture, Rk'0.lf3onat'tiT,j_ Tq: & Dist: Belgaum. 4' l'._.gSri.Ba~svis'ppe Balappa Budari 65'"years, Occ: Agriculture, "'-Rgfqlumnal, Tq: & Dist: Belgaum. _..:j_,vS__IiiBharamanna Balappa Budari Age: 62 years, OCCZ Agriculture, R/owlumnal, Tq: & Dist: Belgaum. ...<*"*v-~..» 7'. Sri.Sidarai Siddappa Rajakatti Age: 62 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Kakati, Tq: & Dist: Belgaum. (By Sri.Srinand A. Pachchapure, Advocate.) AND: State of Karnataka, By Kakati Police Station, Now rep. By HCGP. ._ V _ "-,_.i.iR'iesp§ondent. (By Sri.P.H.Gotkhir1di, HCGP.) This Criminal Petition is. filed' U/_S_.¥i.3.o8ViCr.P.C. by the Advocate for the petitioneijsprayingjthati'thi's.7Hon'ble Court may be pleased to;gi'ari"t ar;_ticgipatory"i:é'a.i.l___Vtfo the petitioners with conditions___«inq<Cir_i,t1f2e" N.912z3i--..x'2fG{)9 by the respondent
Kakati Poiice * This petitiori co'mi"1'1.ig orders this day, the Court made the ffOi1OWi"figJi , A ..VfAi'vh'e~iacicJus_ed No.6 to 23 in Crime No.23]/2009 of 3ii:"i.._[<iakati.'Pi3i., which is registered for the offence .i_y'p1i,4nis'hable~£if':Sec-s.363, 366 of IPC and U/Sec.3(l)(xii) of of Atrocities) Act 1989, have filed the iiioiioiii petition U/Sec/138 of ci~.i>.c. This petition is <-'-='-..("\""'\--~ ...Pet opposed by the prosecution by filing written objections to it.
2) Heard the arguments of both the of the prosecution as alleged inf'tih'e"~cAo'i.np_;l.a:iVnt_ 15/9/2009 filed by the complaisnant sltttmyeasts_ W/o.Dundappa Sanadi, resident iofihii,akat'i',._l'"I'*q:ifi.= aii.;:;dllllI)ist:
Belgaurn, is as under: V a The com lAaVin.ant"s. minor hter namely SrideVii'i::jg.twho:i-.«wash s't'ud'yi;iI1g.ttViiin PUC Commerce.,cgo5urs'e;, at 'Bie-1.gaiurn~»»C"ity was found inissinlg frontfilter-..§:v'egin'i.fi'g'..o'f'i30"' August 2009 and laterxtl'1e that she was detained in the house of one Balappa «--..pa'-glhat-ti (.A.2)i." nnnnn L glbs)?ttr.ll.tiigotrthis/9/2009 accused Nogé to 13 per.f4orn1c.d:i'i:narriage of the complainant's said i<,_n'1inor~ daughter with accused No.1 without the V' ii..ffciion's.entlii of the complainant. The c--oin;a1ainant's said daughter, being minor,was ' ,....- ....«~,..v~
-incapable of giving consent to her marriage it with accused No.1.
("*(M~"~""
C) The complainant belongs to Naik/ _ 2 Bedar Caste, which is a Scheduled Caste. The it accused Nogl to 4, not belonging to a_ny'*--
Scheduled Caste, wlongfully confinedV__.lv_t_'h.e'if' C compiair1ant's said minor dfi/1ig§hAtieir"wi'th gthefi assistance of accused Nogp to ii"i"hpiey.V performed the marriage of'ithe-,inino";' girl the accused No.i without the'-consent"of:thei% complainant being ~«._ofT"'the said minor girl. C C C C A
3) On the bas:giasr'loftheiisaid:_compla*i'nt the above said crime came to beugregister-3_c}.o aiii the accused No.1 to :3 for the semi offie7lIioCefS';i _T'h_e"v:ac*cused Not who is alleged to have married'lthgelsalid 'without the consent of the com.plain;»ai-nt?"accused»I§lo,2 to 4 who are alleged to have wro-ngf.ul'l--.yg the said minor girl for th.e purpose of 'i'e»..._perforriiin'g her'ijr1a:i'riage with the accused No.i.,ha.ve been (,_,---.:,,.',.---v-v ..i_fgr.a_ht_,ed bail the Sessions Court on their application filed Cr.P.C. This fact is not in dispute.
c
4) There is no specific allegation in the complaint that accused No.6 to 13 also do not belong Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and thereforti the attention of the Court as toJthe"«a.bSe11ceV:"io_f_"t:his":
allegation Sri.Srinand Pachchapare, lie-arned:.C;o:ii'nselttioriVF, the petitioners, strongly contende'ld..VAi_tl1at, under any of the provision of 'syc;,/srfl(pm-teAtictat.y 1989 could be made out against these petit,i.or:i_e--rs;l--.A V 5 On care-fulgiireradiiitt 1:-oftl1e--,aVieirhitents in the said complaint iiii sieelh that""lthere is no specific-
averments th.at«theselii:_i'p_et<i.ti'o.n..ers, who are respectively accused No.6 to" _13=.bel.'ong to a caste which is not a S'cVh.edule'di.Ciaste"..,Besideisthis, these petitioners are alleged to have=per17or'miedij'-the marriage of the said minor girl with i".;--giaic'c:.ised They are alleged to have committed the under 'clause (xii) of Sec.3(i.) of SC/ST (PA) Act. * it H On careful reading of the penal provisions of the clause it could be seen that if any person being in 3 r.c§"*-/* position to dominate the will of a woman belonging_..t__o a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe uses that exploit her sexually to which she would not i agreed, would be liabie to be punished.
7) It is not the case of"ith'e_pros~ecutio'nVlt~h'a--t...thiese 2 L' petitioners, being in a position to...irl:ogmi'n_.ate..th'ei..wi.li of the said girl, exploited her sexually.l"Of'ilthleldt*he'1-.'hand it is the case of the prosecut.ion_ that they participated in the girl with the accused £t:g~ig.¢li'.sltedl._lth'e"accused Nos.2 to 4 in performing person not belonging to Scheduledg.-Castle"...:lPeerlfor'nf1ing the marriage of a girl person not belonging to SC/ST is under any of the clauses of Sec.3(1) "ggoflthe said Act. 'V It"'iis alleged in the complaint that when the objected to the said marriage, the petitioner 2 told her that no force on the earth could stop W them from performing the marriage. Referring to_.__this allegation the learned High Court Government strongly contended that this threat given to the c'o__inp:lgai'iia11tl_"t H by these petitioners amounts to a'nMiio'ffen-«ce.;'uVnder_"the"1 provisions of SC/ST (PA) Act and ther'etb.re of Sec.438 of case. cannot be invaiai by' siec.1s of the said Act.
9) Per contra placvi.ng:._reI'iiagn»ce'ii"g§§'*kite decision of this Court in the...c«a'se%""¢:3_.j*' Cii:iIi:k_iappi;fjp*aihi1libiilrers vs. State of Karnataka, in [LR 2601 Karnataka for the petitioners-
accused that the averments in the at their' face value, do not constitute against these petitioners punishable iiifiiil.liri1{iei' any provisions of SC/ST (PA) Act and provisions of Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. could be the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail. It is V"-.iaii'dV down in the said case as under:
(--..r-~ (A) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Central Act No.33 of 1989) ~ Section 18 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CentralppjfxctfV'=.l' 99 No.2 Of 1974) -- Section 43«s'"'"
Section 18 creates a bar lforil:i'nvo'king,' , provisions of Section 43:8:_'o_Vf Criminal Procedure still it _Ea'i lopen the', High Court alone tovsee w'i1etlier__pri~.ma facie case is made out to sustain tlI1elp'ro.secAutio__n.
'clot-1rse:,--_ ex_e1'c'i'se..3 of finding twitch 'iprimg, ifa,¢c9:,et'*{material allegat»i_o'n [in my should be Vgerlj/'E'ieniited'7}ai1dl'to'be eiercised by the -_l~Eigh°7.C-oluirt"al'one,- The Court will havetpotake'-~ai"i»ool< at the First Infor:_r_;at,ion/co.m'p,l'aint and the .~a.llegat"io,nsVrnadeat therein to find whetA'h'C¥..,____the essence of the V off'ence,_under the Act is made out. =.If=..C'o'_nrt°find such material, then it l1as7to rfejéct the application under ,l'lSecti'o'in<';438 Cr.P.C. as prohibited by! Section 18 of the Act. On the , otlitr hand, if no prima facie case " is made out to show commission of _:}tlie offence under the Act, certainly, this Court can consider the application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
c-»«----(.N""""""9
(B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) act, 2989 _ (Central Act No.33 of 1989) -- Section in if , Offence under this Section is only when a person not ;belon'g.in.g Scheduled Caste and Tribes «.
way of intentional insult inti"m.ida_tes_ person belonging to schedule__dlca_s't.e iniiat-p_lace_i? within public view.
Keeping thefapimls arizd ob}'ects;'oif"t;t.l5;e act 0f7pti'nAiishingfthe offen_c'e" untoL1--c_ha.,'bility. and comnlé_iVssii_o,n of ._Vaitif_oc'itti'esl} on the p.Cl"'SOI1_iS'f.bE5l:%';}}'1gl'Ilg-. to "and ST, added to'..~vth.sis,.pit.rfiu_st_be noted that as~_pe_r 'Sect.ifon'*3._'i'its"e_lt', it must be prima-facie showii---,tVtihlat the accused is not'~Va"me';nb'-erlof SC or ST and llhits humwiliativuan by way of
--._i'intenti.or1ali"i'r1's'ult or intimidation _ wjas.p-co"nducted in a place, within S rp.u"o_l ic V V 4_ V the opening sentence of Section 3 itself shows "
not being a member of Scheduled if 'V.,_Caste or Scheduled Tribe". There
-fmust be prima-facie affirmation or say in the Complaint that the accused are not the members of SC or ST.
c___-§""--u--'°"--....--~.--
ll mens-rea and the object of such insult or intimidation "to humiliate". As such, if the entire picture of the incident as alleged by the Complainant is taken into _ account, prima--facie it appears t.e:-'""' nae that it was a sirnple"iciasc«y_o-«f V quarrel between two p_a'rti'es'=._ 2 regarding taking of water and as in fact admitted by tl1ei__C~Qmplia-inant himself, this quarrel wiasiilgoingii for sometime, it,.appears--tl'1vat"'or1 the"
date of incide_nt.. it :bii'1'-s__1v._'iAnto further action byi.g'threa'*ts, _abuses. and obstruction A0.ni_t~he' part"
accused .-.pin--~cludin_g thVe'~~."_:..aulle"ged assaulptgisxpv ;:1:,..\ 2% .
10) Fiollowtiftg .4a'f.o1'esa.idii observations of this Court in the isaidppcasei; ~-ii'-arr:--..__of""the opinion that provisions of Sec.l8 of the iiSC.i/aSxT'ii(Pi}\)iAct do not come in the way of entertiain_ing "petition for anticipatory bail U/Sec.438 of Cr.P.iiC-_"i"n_.ais'ifi:.uch"'as, the averments in the complaint do iiinot-constiitutegany of the offences under the said Act.
is} :fThe Very fact that this petition for anticipatory is___elseriously opposed by the prosecution goes to show apprehension of the petitioners that they would be ¢""'-«-»fN\"h'"""»'m.
1') arrested by the police in the said case appears to be quite reasonable and well founded. The apprehension prosecution that these petitioners may misuse th'~e__iili.be:f'ty"
they are granted anticipatory bail imposing suitable conditions. Hence the---_tol1owin--g.:ip. Q' oRDERf\ '""
The present petition .fi"...3_d (_3/S"e'g.:_gt3iip8-._of Cri.iP.Ci. by the petitioners No.l to 7Vwho are'resipeicftiVeilhyffwacicused No.6 to 13 in Crime '*--P.=S., Belgaum, is hereby allotyfed, their arrest in the said case, these petitioners' shall on bail on each of them furnishingia self bio'11.dwfor:a sum of Rs.30,000/-- along with one._VsuVrie*ty for'~th..e"'li_l<e sum to the satisfaction of the Police hi",_Qfficef.air1'iestiri-gthem, subject to conditions that:
they shall not directly or indirectly f_"tam"p.er with the prosecution evidence nor shall
-- theiyihthreaten the prosecution witnesses. C-_n...§%\"""""' I3
13) they shall co--operate with the 1.0.
in the investigation of this case.
Operative portion of this order shall be of Kakati P.S., for information and co-rr1"p'iiar1e_.e. Mrk/~