Karnataka High Court
Sri. Siddappa S/O Satyappa Pujeri vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 December, 2022
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100558 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI. SIDDAPPA S/O SATYAPPA PUJERI
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. JODAKURALI ,
TQ. CHIKKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591201
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K ANANDKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH POLICE SUB INSPECTOR
CHIKKODI POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING
DHARWAD
2. MARUTHI S/O. PARASHURAM KAMBLE
R/O. JADAKURALI VILLAGE, CHIKKODI TQ,
DIST.BELAGAVI-5911201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V.MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1.
SRI. NAVEEN CHATRAD FOR SRI. VITTAL S. TELI, ADVS. FOR R2.)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT, SEEKING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL APPEAL
AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASE TO ISSUE DIRECTION TO THE
RESPONDENT PSI CHIKKODI POLICE TO RELEASE THE
APPELLANT-ACCUSED ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN
RESPECT OF IN CRIME NO.193/2022. THE PETITIONERS
OFFENCES ALLEGED U/S 341, 323, 355, 504, 506 OF IPC, SO
ALSO U/S 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT.
-2-
CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The sole accused has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 28.10.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1341/2022 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, whereunder the petition filed by the appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.193/2022 of Chikkodi Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 355, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) and Section 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989(hereinafter referred to as 'SC & ST Act', for brevity) came to be rejected.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, one Maruti Parashuram has filed the complaint stating that he belongs to scheduled caste and he has procured space for building the house in gomal area -3- CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022 of his village and he has demarcated his site by installing cement poles around it. Likewise others have also fenced the sites in Gomal area. The appellant has taken exception for complainant having got that site alleging that he would build godown in the site. Accordingly, the appellant/accused was harassing the complainant and that on 13.09.2022 at 11:00am, the complainant went to the bus stop in the village along with one Basagouda Patil. The complainant complained before the said Basagouda Patil that he had purchased a portion of Gomal land about 10 years back and making preparation for construction of house and at that time, the appellant/accused abused him and alleged that in lieu of site, the complainant had taken Rs.10,000/-. The complainant stated that he had not taken money in respect of the site and so saying the appellant/accused caught hold of the shirt of the complainant abusing him in filthy language. The appellant/accused further abused the complainant saying that, he being a SC person, how he can construct house in the land belonging to -4- CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022 Kurubas and abused him taking the name of his caste and assaulted with fist on his mouth and assaulted on his left cheek with chappal and started kicking him, at that time, Basagouda, Sudhakar and Parashuram rescued him. The appellant went away giving live threat to the complainant. The said complaint came to be registered in Chikkodi Police Station Crime No.193/2022 for the aforesaid offences. The appellant/accused apprehending his arrest filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.1341/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, by order dated 28.10.2022. The appellant has challenged the said order in the present appeal.
3. Heard the learned counsel the appellant, counsel for respondent No.1 and the learned Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that there is no prima facie case against the appellant for the offences alleged against him and -5- CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022 the complainant has misused the provisions of SC and ST Act. It is his further submission that the complainant is in the habit of filing the complaints and he had filed a complaint registered in Chikkodi PS Crime No.159/2022 against 2 persons. He has also filed another complaint registered in Chikkodi Police Station Crime No.46/2011 and in the said crime, trial was held in Spl.Case No.59/2011 and the accused persons were acquitted by judgment dated 13.09.2011. It is his further submission that all these aspects shows that the complainant is in the habit of filing complaints. It is his further submission that he could not produce the said documents pertaining to the above said crimes while considering his petition seeking anticipatory bail and prays for remanding the matter with liberty to produce the said documents before the Special Court.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant submits that the Special Court taking into consideration that there is prima facie -6- CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022 case against the appellant and taking into consideration the bar under Sections 18 and 18A of the SC &ST Act, has rightly rejected the prayer of the appellant seeking anticipatory bail and there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Special Court. With this he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader has reiterated the contentions urged by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has perused the documents.
8. The Special Court, based on the material produced by the appellant/petitioner held that there is prima facie case against the appellant and the case attracts the provisions of SC & ST Act and has -7- CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022 also taking into consideration the bar contained under Section 18 of SC & ST Act.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, if the documents produced in this appeal pertaining to Crime No.159/2022, 46/2011 and the judgment passed in Spl.Case No.59/2011, they are able to establish that there is no prima facie case against the appellant. The said documents were not produced before the Special Court at the time of passing of the impugned order. Therefore, under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded by giving opportunity to the appellant to produce the above said documents and to direct the Sessions/Special Court to consider the same and pass orders afresh on the petition filed by the appellant seeking anticipatory bail after giving an opportunity to respondent No.2 and the State.
10. Under the circumstances, the following order:
-8-CRL.A No. 100558 of 2022
The criminal appeal is partly allowed. The order dated 28.10.2022 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1341/2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Special/Sessions Court with a direction to consider Crl.Misc.No.1341/2022 afresh by giving opportunity to the appellant to produce the above referred documents after giving an opportunity to the complainant and the State to address oral arguments and produce the documents. Respondent No.2 or his counsel is directed to appear before the Session/Spl.Court on 09.01.2023.
Sd/-
JUDGE KMV