Karnataka High Court
Sri Kadappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 January, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:67
CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2279 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRI KADAPPA
S/O. LATE MANCHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 306,
PEENYA 1ST STAGE,
NEXT TO KEB COMPOUND,
ASHRAYA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 058.
2. JOGI @ JOGIGOWDA,
S/O. LATE KULLANINGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 665,
PEENYA 1ST STAGE,
NEXT TO KEB COMPOUND,
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA ASHRAYA NAGAR,
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH BENGALURU - 560 058.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K. HEMANTH KUMAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BELAKAVADI POLICE, MANDYA,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:67
CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SHALINI
D/O. MUTTU,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 03, SRS ROAD,
PEENYA, ASHRAYA NAGAR,
NEAR INDIRA CANTEEN,
BENGALURU - 560 058
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP., ADVOCATE FOR R1,
SMT. SWASTHISHREE JAIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2).
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT, 2015 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANTS PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.11.2023 IN
CRL,.MISC.NO.11238/2023 PASSED BY LXX ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU ENLARGE THE
APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN CR.NO.219/2023 RMC YARD POLICE
/RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S.323,427,448,354,355,504,506 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND
SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989 PENDING ON THE
FILES BEFORE THE COURT OF LXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-71).
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 praying to set aside the order dated 28.11.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.11238/2023 by LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereunder the bail -3- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 petition of the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 sought in respect of Crime No.219/2023 of RMC Yard Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 355, 448, 427, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short the 'SC & ST Act'), came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.11.2023 at about 4.30 p.m., the public were consuming alcohol in front of the house of the complainant. They started an altercation with the complainant, who abused her in filthy language. The complainant recorded the same in her mobile. The accused threatened her with dire consequences by removing her cloth. At about 9.00 p.m., they trespassed into the house of the complainant, abused -4- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 her by taking her caste name, assaulted her sister and mother with a slipper, even pulled the saree of her mother, snatched her chain from her neck and damaged her mobile. While she tried to record the atrocities of the accused, they tore her clothes, touched her body and threatened her.
4. After filing the complaint, a case has been registered against these appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 and another in Crime No.219/2023 of RMC Yard Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 355, 427, 488, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC & ST Act.
The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 came to be arrested on 15.11.2023 and they are in judicial custody. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed Crl.Misc.No.11238/2023 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 28.11.2023, which is challenged in this appeal.
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023
5. Learned counsel for the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 would contend that the appellants are in judicial custody since 15.11.2023. As the major portion of the investigation is already complete, they are not required for custodial interrogation. In the remand application, it is stated that appellant/accused No.1 belongs to the scheduled caste. Therefore, there is no question of any abuse by the appellant/accused No.1 to the complainant and her family members taking their caste name. The appellant No.1/accused No.1 has filed a complaint, which came to be registered in NCR No.263/2023 in RMC Yard Police Station against the complainant and her family members. Therefore, as a counter, the complainant has filed the present complaint belatedly on 14.11.2023. Hence, there is a delay in filing the FIR. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are ready to co-operate with the police in the investigation. The offences alleged against the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are not punishable by either death or life imprisonment. Without considering these aspects, learned Special Judge -6- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 has passed the impugned order, which requires interference by this Court. With this, he prays to allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellants/accused Nos.1 and
2.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and leaned counsel for respondent No.2 both would contend that if the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are granted bail, they may hamper with the investigation and threaten the complainant and her family members. It is further contended that the appellants trespassed into the house of the complainant, assaulted her with chappals, pulled her mother's saree, snached her chain, damaged her mobile and outraged the modesty of the complainant. The alleged acts against the these appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are serious. The investigation is in progress and the appellants are required for custodial interrogation. Considering the said aspects, the learned Session Judge has passed the impugned order, which does not call for -7- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 interference by this Court. With this, they pray to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court has gone through the impugned order, FIR, compliant, remand application and other documents.
8. The bail petition of the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 came to be rejected on the ground that the investigation is in progress and the chain has not yet been recovered. There is no allegation of robbing the chain of the complainant. The offences alleged against the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are not punishable by either death or life imprisonment. The appellants are in judicial custody since 15.11.2023. As the major portion of the investigation is over, they are not required for the custodial interrogation. The apprehension of the prosecution that if the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are granted bail, there are chances of hampering with the investigation and threatening the complainant and her family members can be met with by imposing stringent -8- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 conditions. Without considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has passed an impugned order, which requires interference by this Court.
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 have made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order and granting bail subject to terms and conditions. In the result, the following:
ORDER The appeal is allowed.
The order dated 28.11.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.11238/2023 by LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru is set aside. Consequently, the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are granted bail and they are ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.219/2023 of RMC Yard Police Station, subject to the following conditions;
a. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of -9- NC: 2024:KHC:67 CRL.A No. 2279 of 2023 Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court; b. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not threaten the complainant or tamper other prosecution witnesses. c. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall co-operate with Investigating Officer in investigation.
d. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case. e. The appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not enter the vicinity of the complainant.
Sd/-
JUDGE KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12