Karnataka High Court
Mr Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 26 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:47010
CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2281 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MR. KUMAR
S/O. LATE MUNINARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT ASHWINI LAYOUT
CHINTAMANI TOWN - 563 125.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR COUNSEL, FOR
SRI KARIAPPA N. A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHINTAMANI TOWN POLICE STATION
CHINTAMANI - 563 125
CHIKKABALLAPURA
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 560 001.
Digitally signed 2. MR. MURALI
by VINUTHA M S/O. TIPPANNA
Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL COUNSELLOR
RESIDING AT AGRAHARA
CHINTAMANI TOWN
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 563 125.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1,
SRI KALYAN R., ADVOCATE, FOR R-2)
***
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:47010
CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2)
OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27-11-2023 PASSED IN CRIME NO.194/2023 OF CHINTAMANI
TOWN POLICE STATION PASSED ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 307 READ WITH SECTION
34 OF THE IPC AND UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) AND 3(2)(v)
OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE HIM ON
BAIL.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The appellant/accused No.4 has filed this appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [for short, 'SC/ST (POA) Act'] praying to set aside the order dated 27-11-2023 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, in Crime No.194/2023 of Chintamani Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (for short, 'IPC') and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, whereby the application filed by the appellant seeking bail has been rejected.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023
2. Heard Sri Hasmath Pasha, learned senior counsel for the appellant, Smt. N. Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State, Sri Kalyan R., learned counsel for respondent No.2- complainant and perused the material available on record.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 14-10-2023 at 00:30 a.m., the Sub-Inspector of Police- II of Chintamani Town Police Station lodged a complaint alleging that on 13-10-2023 at 6:15 p.m., while he along with CHC-177 were on patrolling duty, they received a call from an unknown person, wherein he informed that near Veerabhadreshwara Bakery, Gajanana Circle, M.G. Road, Chintamani, the victim Murali, Municipal Councillor of Chintamani City, has been assaulted by some unknown persons with weapons on his head, hands and caused bleeding injuries and he was shifted to the Government hospital, Chintamani, for treatment. Hence, he and CHC- 177 came to the hospital and saw the injured Murali, a member of City Municipality, who was brought by -4- NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 Thirumalappa. Thus, he enquired Thirumalappa and came to know that about three to four persons attempted to commit the murder of Murali. Hence, he lodged a suo moto complaint, which led to registration of F.I.R. and investigation.
4. During the course of investigation, the Sub- Inspector of Police recorded the statement of the victim on 15-10-2023, wherein, the victim disclosed the names of the accused persons. Hence, the Investigating Officer arrested accused Nos.1 to 4 and in turn, they were remanded to judicial custody. The appellant filed an application seeking bail before the trial Court and the same was rejected on 27-11-2023. Hence, the appellant is before this Court.
5. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant/accused No.4 has contended that as per the case of the prosecution, the victim was assaulted by accused Nos.1 to 3 and the appellant abetted only the commission of offence. Now, the investigation is -5- NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 completed and the charge-sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 to 4. He further contended that F.I.R. was registered against three unknown persons. After three days of the incident, a Report was submitted invoking the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act and in the Report, the appellant was not arraigned as one of the accused persons. He has further contended that as per the statement of the victim, the incident of assault on him was on account of previous enmity and political rivalry, and not on the account that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste. Thus, the provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act are not applicable. It is further contended that at the time of the admission of the victim to the hospital, the victim was conscious and was able to speak and the history given by him was that he was assaulted by some unknown persons around 6:15 p.m. Further, the statement of one Thirumalappa who brought the victim to the hospital was not recorded and it was not treated as F.I.R. at 6:30 p.m., but after six hours i.e., at 00.30 hours, the Sub-Inspector of Police-II registered an F.I.R. by preparing a suo-moto -6- NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 report against three unknown persons and the reasons for the delay is not explained. It is contended that the appellant is a known person to the victim and Thirumalappa, but his name did not figure in the F.I.R. and the complaint. Even, while admitting the victim to the hospital on 14-10-2023, the history given was he was assaulted by unknown persons. It is only after three days of the incident, when further statement of the victim was recorded in the Manipal Hospital, the name of the appellant figured along with accused Nos.1 to 3. Hence, till 20-10-2023, the appellant was not treated as an accused and only on 21-10-2023, in the remand application, for the first time, he was arraigned as accused No.4. It is contended that there are various litigations between the victim and the appellant and hence, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further contended that in fact, on the date of the incident, the appellant was at Devanahalli Airport and he has taken the plea of alibi. It is contended that the victim is a rowdy- sheeter. Now the victim is recovered and discharged from -7- NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 the hospital. It is contended that the appellant has no criminal antecedents; he is having two daughters; his mother is aged 80 years; he is an Agriculturist by avocation; he has deep roots in the society; he is ready to furnish solvent surety for his release and he is ready to abide by any of the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for allowing the appeal.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State has contended that the appellant is involved in a heinous offence, punishable under Section 307 of the IPC; he abetted accused Nos.1 to 3 in the crime. Hence, they assaulted the victim with a knife and chopper on his head, hands, shoulder and knee which are vital parts of the human body; the appellant is a rowdy-sheeter involved in various criminal cases and hence, there is prima-facie case against the appellant. If the appellant is enlarged on bail, there is likelihood of he tampering with the prosecution case and hampering trial. Hence, she prayed for rejecting the appeal. -8-
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023
7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2- complainant submits that there is sufficient material to show that the appellant is a rowdy-sheeter; he has uploaded some photos in the social media by holding a knife with children. There are various criminal cases pending against the appellant and due to his rivalry with the victim, he engaged accused Nos.1 to 3 to attack the victim. Hence, there is sufficient material against the appellant to attract Section 307 of the IPC.
8. Considering the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties, the following point arises for my consideration:
"Whether the appellant is entitled for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as prayed for in the appeal memo?"
I answer to the above point in the affirmative for the following reasons:
-9-
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 From perusal of the complaint, statement of the victim and the remand application, it appears that on account of previous enmity between the appellant and the victim, on 13-10-2023 at 6:15 p.m., near Veerabhadreshwara Bakery, accused Nos.1 to 3 assaulted the victim on his head, hands, knee and shoulder and caused bleeding injuries and thereby, attempted to commit his murder. Initially, the crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC against unknown persons. The statement of the victim transpires that accused Nos.1 to 3 assaulted him with weapons and caused bleeding injuries. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested and on enquiry, it was revealed that at the instigation of the appellant, they assaulted the victim. The victim is now discharged from the hospital. As per the Discharge Summary, the victim sustained the following injuries:
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 "a. Laceration wound measuring 1 cm in length x 2.5 cm depth on right parietal bone extruding to center.
b. Laceration wound measuring 8-9 cm in length 2 cm depth on left parietal region.
c. Laceration wound measuring 7-8 cm in length and 2-2.5 cm in depth in region.
d. Open wound with deep cut from right to right little toe on anterior (pulmonary aspect with muscle and deep tissue injuries with bleeding) e. Cut (open wound) around 10 cm length and around 3-4 cm depth with cut of muscles depth on posterior aspect middle part of left forearm. f. Laceration/cut wound around 9-10 cm in length and 2.5-3 cm in depth with bleeding from center of the point b/w bone of left thumb and left wrist and extending till tip of left little finger with fracture of fifth mete bone."
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 The Discharge Summary indicates that the victim underwent plastic surgery and he was discharged from hospital on 18-10-2023. He was advised to take periodical treatment and it is further observed that after operative evaluation and obtaining consent, the patient was taken to plastic surgery and post-operative recovery were uneventful. As per the investigation record, the prosecution has not placed any material that the victim was once again admitted to the hospital for further treatment.
9. From perusal of the record, it reveals that the provisions of Section 307 of the IPC would attract against accused Nos.1 to 3 and at the most, the appellant would be liable for instigation of accused Nos.1 to 3 for commission of offence under Section 307 of the IPC. Now, the investigation is completed and the charge-sheet is filed. At this juncture, the ingredients of Section 307 of the IPC are not attracted against the appellant. Further, the
- 12 -
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
10. This Court has considered the nature of the offence, the circumstances in which the offence is committed, position and status of the appellant with reference to the victim and witnesses; likelihood of fleeing away from justice; of repeating same offences by the appellant, of tampering with the witnesses, character and antecedents of the appellant. Further, the law is well settled that while disposing off a bail petition, the Court need not scan the prosecution papers and hold a mini trial. Keeping all these aspects in mind, this Court has gone through the entire material placed on record and it appears that, prima-facie, there are no reasonable and sufficient grounds to believe, at this stage, that the appellant is guilty of the offences alleged. Considering the nature of offences and circumstance of the case, particularly, the allegations levelled against the appellant, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled for
- 13 -
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 grant of bail. Accordingly, the Court answered point No.1 in the affirmative. Hence, the Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER Criminal appeal is allowed.
The appellant/accused No.4 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.194/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, pending on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, subject to the following conditions:
i. The appellant shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;
ii. The appellant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;
- 14 -
NC: 2023:KHC:47010 CRL.A No. 2281 of 2023 iii. The appellant shall not commit similar offences;
iv. The appellant shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail, and v. The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without its prior permission.
Sd/-
JUDGE KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51