Karnataka High Court
Shri Rafiq Maktumbsab Almel vs The State Of Karnataka By Its State ... on 24 February, 2010
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATABA CIRCUIT BENCH AT Ot TLBARGA DATED: THIS THE 240) DAY OF FEBRUARY 2070) BEFORE 9» THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVAD CER RAMESH. | CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 33: 4 OF 2006. mo BETWEEN lL. SPUR J AGED 3B Yl 25 R/O SHiny ARIRDY BIZAPLR o- > SHREMUNNA GA KBAR MAK ITEMSAB ALMEL AGED 34 RS OC EPEDINARY ASSISTANT <AGGOD VETERINARY. F OSt YTAL R/O SHIKARKH [ANA BISAPUL SHE 1 KUTURUDDIN CALIBSAB ALMICL AGED © "s YEARS CREE OOL! "RO "Sh HIS ARK HANA " BEEARUTS 'ae AMBAWWA VIJAYARU MAR PAWAR ED Jb ! 2 ee OC CoH WORK 6) SMT RIYANA W/O SHAFIG Al MEL eas BA ARS EEE SEARS SSo S OS SSTO oR -- R/O SHIRARBHANA . BLIAPLER . APPELLANTS | (By Sri. ASHOK R KALYANAS! TETPY. ADVOCATE) | 'THI STAPE OF KARNATAKA 9 0 BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADvocaTe GENERAL'S OFFICE HIGH COURT BUILDING ee BANGALORE Ol i 6 MRESPONDENT (By Sri. SHARANABASAPPA.K. BABSTIETTY CGP | CRIA FILED UUS.S74C CRP.C. AGAINST 1 UDGMENT PYG Pol [.06/2. 2. Ga PP ASSE BY THE 0 ADDL SESSIONS & Sa ope i APE SPL.CASE NO,22 /04 * ae HINGe "ee on 1.2.4.5. 6 POR His OFP ; i LGR 304, 396 RAW 146 TPC AnD LYS, 3} esr (PAL AGT 1989 AND SENTENCING HEM TO L 3 FOR A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS FOR THE QFE 2 Ss i4e8 RYW 149 OF IPC AND FURTHER SEN TE ENC ING T eM SDERGO Si. FOR A PERIOD OF SIA MONTHS © 'OR Te OFF P/U /S.324 RAW 149 OF TRC AND PU RPHIER SENTENCI ING THEM' TO UNDERGO S.1. FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR ANDOTO PA MY FINE OF RS.1.000/- EACH AND ED... OP PAYMENT OF PINIL TREY SHOU LD UNDERGO? SJ POR CH 325 RY 149 OF IPC AND 7 - } i PURTHER PERIOD OF THREE MON Tes POR "PRE OF FENCI as | rd | 3 4 F fis BOSE, FOR A PERIOD 2800 / EAC BOOED, Sal oF "OH ° _OF PINE "eey HOD OF PWG SCE FSC A&A ST CPA Al, SE NTENCES ARE ORDERS 8 _: This criminal appeal coming on for hearing, this day, the Court delivered the following: kaa? a & Na LESLIE ESSE GC ee ote er JUDGMENT
This appeal filed by the accused to set aside tho judement and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Hl Addl. dudge. Bijapur in Sessions Case. No.22 /2004.
2, The accused were charge. sheeted for the olfences punishable under Sections i45. 147, 146. 324, 504 rw. 149 'PC and also for an offence punishable undeé:Section 3tij(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Seneduted cribe { Prevention of Atrocities} Act, L989. ' A oGo-As per the prosecution case, om 22.17.2003 a around Svar when mother of CW1 one Siddawwa was standing in. front of rear door of their house, accused No.S wernt to throw garbage near the rear door of house of OW 1], at that time. complainant questioned as to why they were throwing the garbave then she said that they will throw the garbage there only and do whatever they SA Nad LS a wart and told them to fence the area at that time... At fhat time. accused Nos. | to 4 and 6 and 7 came there abusing them in a filthy language taking out the name, of their caste and assaulted CW7 with hands and when. CWl went to rescue his rother-he.too said fo Rave - been assaulted with a stone causing bleeding Injuries. Al assaulted on the left. arm and. left. knee and or the right hand. At that time, CW4 sister's daughter of CW! and his sister CWS came to rescue them and they were assaulted with bands by abusing them touching their caste. .Thereatter, others came there and rescued CW) and his mother CW and other family members, Later the injured namely CWs. 1 and 7 were treated at BLDE Hospital. Bijapur. A complaint was also lodged. police affer investigation filed the charge sheet. The learned SpecialJudge framed the charges against the accused, "accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined in all 14 witnesses and got marked about 10 documents anc MO.L club and MO2Z Vee e stick, Thereafter, after hearing the arguments alter recording Section 314 statement. Al. A2. Ad to AG were sentenced for the offence punishable under Section (48° wc te undergo St for three mIOTi bers... for ihe. offence ; punishable under Section 324 [PC 40 uunderto 5! lor Six months, for the offence under Section 325.1PC one year Sl with fine of Rs. i 0004, each arid defautt sentence of three months and also they were sentenced to underg¢ Si six months ene to. pay~a firie "of Rs.500/- each in default to undergo Si foe. fwo raonths for an offence of the SC & ST punishable under "Sec i (Prevention. of Atrocities) Act. 1989. However, all these substantial 'Sentences ordered to be run concurrently, "against which this appeal is preferred.
4.-'The complainant and aceused are present "before tie court and submitted that they are ready to cormpromise the matter it is also stated by the .cemplainant that as is noticed in the usual course such abuse words are being used and there is mo infertion to insult fo take out the name of caste. As such, the pedal, court convicting the accused only on the ground of abusing words are being used by taking Gut'the namé of:
the caste is without examining tite fact that whether intentionally it has been expressed. to insult the complainant and others. iy the 'eye Gf public to under estimate and insult thera. Gut under Section 320 Cr.P.c. all the "offences: thchidinyy: the offence under Section 325 'of whieh accused "are corivieted are compo. ndable with the permission of Che court.
3. The . appeal. is Hled against the order of "conviction and sentence passed. Since the complainant and . decased are intending to compromise and also there iS a cese and counter ease and wher the inciderr _ 'is said " have taken place also admittedly. the accused sald io have thrown darbage In front of the common ed t a es Lew pe ene eepee perenne Ere thie pearsinbeieee boy FSlex bbags yanid. there was mo scope for the complainant to fle the yw = ..
ae complaint. Tf the garbage is thrown in the Jand or property of the complainant then there cou Id have. been Catise of action ior the complainant to fle the complaint. - Since there was mere expression of some words, without any intention to insult.
Hel We, . wh ile pesmi tt ins the:
parties to compound the other offences: lor offence under Section 3] I(x! sc and. ST (Preventi on of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the acct sed. hac 'been acquitted since there is ho prima Tacie case: against the accused for an offence ander Seerion 3) Hos of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989. An affidavit has beer filed to the cifect that t he accused have not abused thers with an 'intention to insull them in the eye of ~ public 'as such there Is NO case against the accused for an ofteniee phnishable under Section S(1}ix) of SC and ST Prevention of Atrocities aci.
-6. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is alowed .. permitting the parties to compound the offence as well er as tO acquit the accused for the offence punishable under Section 3(1}{x) ef SC and st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 while setting aside the order. of:
The bail bonds executed shall stand ca celled Cm /-