IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1837/2019 BETWEEN :
B.S.Pavan S/o B.K.Srinath Aged about 38 years Residing at No.40/11, Aishwarya Castle, III-A, Northern Road, VI Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru-560 082.
(By Sri J.G.Chandra Mohan, Advocate) AND :
State of Karnataka by Malleshwaram Police Station Malleshwaram, Bengaluru-560 003. Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court Building, Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G., HCGP;
… Petitioner … Respondent Notice served on complainant & unrepresented) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.19/2019 of Malleshwaram Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 324, 323, 448, 109 r/w. Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and (n) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to release him on anticipatory bail in Crime No.19/2019 of Malleshwaram Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 324, 323, 448, 109 r/w. section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), (s) and (n) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (‘SC & ST Act’ for short).
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent- State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 31.1.2019 at about 3.00 p.m., the complainant had been to the house of smt.Lakshmi. At that time, accused No.1-Tilak and others trespassed into the house of the said Lakshmi, pulled her and manhandled her. When the complainant tried to intervene and pacify the quarrel, accused persons assaulted the complainant and caused bleeding injuries. They also abused the complainant by touching the name of his caste. It is further alleged that accused Nos.2 and 3 have instigated and abetted accused No.1 while committing the said offence. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that accused No.1 has received a loan by mortgaging the property on 12.10.2006 in favour of petitioner-accused No.2. He did not pay the said loan amount. Petitioner-accused No.2 filed a suit in O.S.No.2982/2008 for recovery of the said amount and the said Lakshmi has purchased the said property on 7.10.2008 and rectification deed was also executed on 27.1.2009. It is further alleged that having come to know about the said transaction, petitioner got impleaded the said Lakshmi in the suit and subsequently, the suit has been decreed directing the sale of the property and to recover the decretal amount and even FDP has also been filed. As such it is contended that the complainant and the said Lakshmi in collusion with the accused, after thought, have filed the false complaint. It is his further submission that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Accused No.2-petitioner was not present at the place of incident and even he has not uttered any words touching the name of the caste of the complainant. The only allegation as against him is that he has instigated and abetted accused No.1 The petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner-accused No.2 instigated accused No.1 and in pursuance of the said instigation, accused No.1 went to the house of Lakshmi and at that time, when the complainant intervened, accused No.1 assaulted and abused the complainant by touching the name of his caste. There is ample material to show that the petitioner is also involved in the alleged crime. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. Even though the complainant has been notified, he has remained absent.
8. On close reading of the contents of the entire material it disclosed the fact that accused No.2, petitioner herein was not present at the place of the alleged incident. The only allegation which has been made in the complaint is that accused No.2-petitioner herein has instigated accused No.1 and he has abused over the phone. It is accused No.1 who took the name of caste of the complainant and abused him. When the petitioner-accused No.2 was not present at the place of incident and has not abused the complainant directly, the question of attraction of the provisions of SC & ST Act does not arise at all. Be that as it may, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. When the petitioner has conspired and instigated accused No.1, that is a matter which has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. Under such circumstances, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, , it would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner-accused No.2 is granted anticipatory bail. In the event of his arrest in Crime No.19/2019 of Malleshwaram Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 324, 323, 448, 109 r/w. section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), (s) and (n) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the petitioner herein is ordered to be released, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
ii) He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from today.
iii) He shall co-operate with the Investigation as and when required.
iv) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.
vi) He shall mark his attendance once in fifteen days before the jurisdictional police between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the charge sheet is filed.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-