Karnataka High Court
Dhananjaya vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 June, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:21692
CRL.A No. 830 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 830 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. DHANANJAYA
S/O MAHADEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT UDDURU VILLAGE
HALLY MYSORE HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT -01.
2. YOGESH
S/O SANAPPA @ EREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT UDDURU VILLAGE
HALLY MYSORE HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT -01.
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA 3. SURESHA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH S/O SANAPPA @ EREGOWDA
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
KARNATAKA
R/AT UDDURU VILLAGE
HALLY MYSORE HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 01.
4. MANJUNATH @ MANJU
S/O GURUMALLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT UDDURU VILLAGE
HALLY MYSORE HOBLI
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:21692
CRL.A No. 830 of 2024
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 01.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI PRATHEEP K C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY HALLY MYSORE POLICE
HASSAN DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE -01.
2. KUMARA
S/O KALASAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT UDDURU VILLAGE
HALLYMYSORE HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 34.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2)OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER IN
CRL.MISC.No.330/2024 DATED 08.04.2024 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE C/C ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AT
HASSAN AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN
CR.No.32/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 323,355,504,149 OF
IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(va),3(1)(r) (s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT BY
RESPONDENT HALLYMYSORE P.S. HASSAN AND PENDING ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AT HASSAN.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:21692
CRL.A No. 830 of 2024
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5, praying to set-aside the order dated 08.04.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.330/2024, by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, whereunder, the anticipatory bail petition filed by the appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5 in respect of Crime No.32/2024, Hallymysore Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 323, 355, 504 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the SC/ST Act"), came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State.
3. Case of the prosecution is that; on 11.03.2024 at about 7.00 pm, respondent No.2 had been to a hotel. In that -4- NC: 2024:KHC:21692 CRL.A No. 830 of 2024 hotel, he found accused No.1 along with his friends accused Nos.2 to 5 quarrelling with Sri.Rudraiah and Sri.Shivakumar of their village. When he tried to intervene and pacify the quarrel, accused Nos.1 to 5 picked up quarrel with him, assaulted him and insulted him with the name of his caste and accused No.1 - Sri.Mohan Kumar slapped him with the slipper on his cheek. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.32/2024 for the offences under Sections 323, 355, 504 r/w Section 149 of IPC, and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. The petitioners who were arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 5 therein, apprehending their arrest have filed a petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, seeking anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.330/2024 and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order, which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the allegations made against the appellants is an omnibus allegation. There is no specific allegation against each of the appellants abusing respondent No.2, taking his caste name. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC:21692 CRL.A No. 830 of 2024 He submits that accused No.1 who is alleged to have assaulted respondent No.2 with slipper on his cheek and who has abused him by taking his caste name in filthy words has been granted bail. He submits that the averments of the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for the offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act and therefore, the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is not attracted. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to the appellants.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State would contend that now charge sheet has been filed against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences under Sections 323, 504, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC, and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. He further submits that on perusal of the averments of the complaint, the offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act is attracted. As there is a bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, the Trial Court has rightly rejected their anticipatory bail petition. He further submits that there are five eye -6- NC: 2024:KHC:21692 CRL.A No. 830 of 2024 witnesses to the incident, but are cited as PWs.2 to 6 in the charge sheet. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the material placed on record and the impugned order.
7. Respondent No.2 intervened in the quarrel between accused No.1 to 5 with Sri.Rudraiah and Sri.Shivakumar. At that time, he has been abused and assaulted by accused Nos.1 to 5 taking his caste name and assaulted with slipper. The accusation of abuse taking the caste name is an omnibus allegation. There is no specific allegation against each of the appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5. What are the abusive words used by each of the appellants- accused Nos.2 to 5 is not stated in the complaint. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said as to what are the abusive words used by each of the appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that there is a prima facie case against the appellants for the offence under section 3 of the SC/ST Act. Therefore, the bar under Section -7- NC: 2024:KHC:21692 CRL.A No. 830 of 2024 18 of the SC/ST Act is not attracted. The other offences alleged against the accused are punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The apprehension of the complainant (respondent No.2) is that if the appellants are granted bail, there are chances of they again assaulting him, would be met with by imposing the stringent conditions. The appellants have made out grounds for grant of anticipatory bail. In the result, the following;
ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 08.04.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.No.330/2024 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan is set-aside. Consequently, Crl.Misc.No.330/2024 filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C is allowed. The appellants / accused Nos.2 to 5 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.32/2024 of Hallymysore Police Station, subject to the following conditions;
(i) The appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (One lakh only) each, with one -8- NC: 2024:KHC:21692 CRL.A No. 830 of 2024 surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer / jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5 shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer / jurisdictional Court, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(iii) The appellants - accused Nos.2 to 5 shall not threaten the complainant or the prosecution witnesses.
Sd/-
JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34