Karnataka High Court
Jayaprakash G vs State Of Karnataka on 9 June, 2023
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:19831
CRL.A No. 879 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 879 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. JAYAPRAKASH G.
S/O SRI. GNANAMURTHY K.N.
AGED 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 49, 6TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN, GEDDALAHALLI,
RMV 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU - 560 094.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
SANJAY NAGAR POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
BHAVANI BAI G BENGALURU - 560 001.
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
2. SMT. JAYASUDHA D.
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
W/O JAYAPRAKASH G.,
NO.219, 626/45
SSVRUDDI APARTMENT
THALAGHATTAPURA
BENGALURU-560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP FOR R1
SRI. H. MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:19831
CRL.A No. 879 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 29.04.2023 IN CRL.MISC.NO.3488/2023
PASSED BY THE LXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU IN SO FAR AS IT
REJECTS THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANT AND
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST, IN
CR.NO.77/2023 OF SANJAYNAGAR POLICE STATION FILED
UNDER SECTION 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT AND SECTION
498A READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4
OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LXX
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL
JUDGE, BENGALURU.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC/ST (POA) Act') challenging the order of dismissal of the anticipatory bail vide order dated 29.04.2023 in Crl.Misc. No.3488/2023 in Crime No.77/2023 registered by the Sanjay Nagar Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and (s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, Section 498A read with -3- NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023 Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'D.P. Act').
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant- respondent No.2 who said to be Gazetted Rank Officer working at Karnataka Secretariat filed a complaint to the Police on 10.04.2023 alleging that she herself and the appellant fell in love and after knowing that they are inter caste, their marriage was registered in the office of Registrar of Marriages. They have two children out of their wedlock. Thereafter, the appellant and his family members started harassing her physically and mentally by demanding dowry and also abused her in filthy language by insulting her caste name. After registering the FIR, the Police tried to arrest this appellant as well as his family members. Hence, they approached the -4- NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023 Sessions Judge (Special Court for granting anticipatory Bail) where the Special Court allowed the petition in part by granting anticipatory bail to the family members and rejected the application of this appellant. Hence, he is before this Court,
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the marriage of the complainant and the appellant was held 10 years back. There is no allegation of any insulting in the name of the caste by this appellant. He has filed a divorce petition against her and she has also filed a case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. She has never made any such averment regarding abuse and insulting the members of the SC/ST. But after filing the petition before the Matrimonial Court, she has filed this false complaint to harass the appellant. Absolutely, there is no material to show that the appellant committed offence under the Special Act. He is working as Software Engineer. He is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Learned counsel also contended that she has not attended the Mediation Centre for conciliation. Hence, prayed for granting bail. -5-
NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that there is a prima facie material placed on record especially the complaint for having committed the offence under Section 3 of the Special Act. He has abused her in filthy language by taking her caste name and there is a bar under Section 18 and 18(a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. Hence, prayed for dismissing the appeal.
6. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 who is appearing for the defacto complainant also objected the application and contended that she has not mentioned the very allegation taking her caste in the petition under Section 9 made for Restitution of Conjugal Rights with an intention to join the appellant and to lead happy marital life. They are having two children out of their wedlock. The appellant and his family members harassed her for dowry as well as by taking the caste name. Therefore, prayed for dismissing the appeal.
7. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the records especially on perusal of the FIR and the first information lodged by respondent No.2 which reveals, it is an admitted fact that both of them were fell in love and married on -6- NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023 11.11.2012 and having two children out of their wedlock. Thereafter, the appellant and his family members started harassing her for giving the additional dowry and also commenting on the affairs of respondent No.2 and the appellant also abused her in filthy language taking her caste name stating that "People belonging to your caste are used for brooming the roads/streets and to clean the drainages/gutters, not to perform pooja inside the house". Thereby, she has stated the accused humiliated her by taking the caste name. However, the appellant said to be filed divorce petition before the Family Court for granting divorce and the respondent also appeared in the Family Court. She also filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. The copy of the petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act is produced. On perusal of the entire averments made in the petition about 53 paragraphs, she has not made any such complaint against the appellant for abusing her in filthy language and taking her caste name.
8. Of course, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that she has not narrated the said fact about abusing and insulting her by taking caste name in the petition in order -7- NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023 to lead the happy marital life. Of course, there is a logic in the arguments made by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. However, it is submitted that respondent No.2 is said to be a Gazetted Officer, she is reluctant to go before the Mediation Centre for conciliation. Once she has filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Rights, she has to appear before the Mediation Centre for conciliation. Though, there is material placed on record that he has abused her in filthy language by taking caste name but on the other hand, there is no averments in the objection or Section 9 petition filed by her. Therefore, by looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, where the respondent No.2 wants to lead the marital life with the appellant, if he is sent to the judicial custody or jail, there is no possibility of the mediators to reconcile the family and there is no possibility of leading marital life by her. Therefore, I am of the view, at this stage, it cannot be said there is a prima facie material placed on record under Section 3 of the Special Act and other offences which are IPC offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment of life. Therefore, I am of the view, by imposing certain conditions, if anticipatory bail is granted to the -8- NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023 appellant, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution case.
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
The order of the trial Court rejecting the anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.3488/2023 dated 29.04.2023 is hereby set aside.
The Crl.Misc.No.3488/2023 is allowed and granted anticipatory bail.
The respondent - Police is directed to release the appellant on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.77/2023 registered by the Sanjay Nagar Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and (s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The appellant shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum;
(ii) He shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;
(iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;-9-
NC: 2023:KHC:19831 CRL.A No. 879 of 2023
(iv) He shall surrender before the Police within 15 cdays from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
(v) He shall be deemed to custody for the purpose of any recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872;
(vi) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m., for a period of two months, till filing of the charge-sheet whichever is earlier.
(vii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission of the trial court.
(viii) He shall surrender the passport, if any, to the police and same shall be kept in custody until disposal of the main case.
(ix) If any of the condition is violated the prosecution/victim-defacto complainant is at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE GBB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16