IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1559/2019 BETWEEN 1. SMT. NETRA W/O MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 2. SRI MANJUNATHA S/O ERANNA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O NO.217, 5TH CROSS, T.DASARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, MALLASANDRA, BENGALURU-560057.
3. RANJINI @ RANJITHA K, D/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 4. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE KUNTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, PETITIONERS NO.3 AND 4 ARE R/O YELPENAHALLI, HULIKUNTE HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572113.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI K R RAMESH, ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WOMEN POLICE STATION, TUMKUR TOWN SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR-572101 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
2. MALA G D/O GANGADHARA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/O 2ND CROSS, UPPARAHALLI, TUMKUR TOWN-572102.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B G, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.10/2019 OF WOMEN P.S. TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,323,342,504,506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s),AND 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition has been taken out of turn at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that accused No.3/petitioner No.1 is having a minor kids and there is a threat by the police and if she is apprehended nobody will be there to look-after the minor children. On the said submission, the above case is taken out of turn.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 10, 2 and 5 under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.10/2019 of Women Police Station, Tumkur Town, Tumkur, for the offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC-ST (POA) Act) read with Sections 506, 34, 498-A, 323, 342 and 504 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). Though notice is served to the complainant, she has remained absent.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioners/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
4. Gist of the complaint is that complainant is aged about 19 years. She has fallen in love with one Manjunath. Accordingly, both got married in front of Anjaneya temple at Kateramma temple on 18.01.2019 in the presence of friends and other relatives. Thereafter, they went to the village nearby on 19.01.2019. They came to sister’s house of the Manjunath on 21.01.2019 at Bengaluru she was assaulted and the Manjunath was confined in a room and she has been thrown out of the house saying that she belongs to inter caste/scheduled caste and they forced her to remove the Mangalya Suthra and snatched her mobile phone and thereafter she has been left to Tumkur at about 5:30 p.m. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered.
5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused that the petitioners/accused are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that absolutely there is no material on record to substantiate the fact that the petitioners/accused have committed the offence alleged under the SC-ST (POA) Act. It is further submitted that other offences alleged to have been committed under IPC are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is further submitted that the petitioners/accused are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioners/accused on anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioners/accused have taken the name of the caste and abused the complainant. She further submitted that during the subsistence of the first marriage the said Manjunath got married with the complainant and thereby, he has committed an offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC. She further submitted that the petitioners/accused persons are absconding and they are not available for investigation or interrogation. If they are granted anticipatory bail, they may not be available for enquiry/investigation. On these grounds, she prays to dismiss the petition.
7. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and perused the records.
8. As could be seen from the records and the complaint though the case has been registered under the Atrocities Act, the entire complaint if it is looked into, the only allegation which has been made is that the accused persons have stated that she belongs to inter caste/scheduled caste and as such, she has been ill treated, even as against the petitioners/accused, no attribution has been made to show that they have taken the name of the caste and abused the complainant.
Under the same circumstances, this court is empowered to grant the anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code though there is bar under Section 18(A) of the SC-ST (POA) Act as held in the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharasthra and Another, reported in (2018) 6 SCC 454.
9. Be that as it may, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Whether there is an offence alleged is committed or not is a matter of trial which is considered by the trial court. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 10, 2 and 5 may be ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, to meet the ends of justice. In that light, the petition is allowed and petitioners/accused Nos.3, 10, 2 and 5 is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in Crime No.10/2019 of Women Police Station, Tumkur Town, Tumkur, for the offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v- a) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Sections 506, 34, 498-A, 323, 342 and 504 of IPC, subject to the following conditions.
ORDER 1. In the event of arrest, the Investigating Officer is directed to enlarge the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 10, 2 and 5 on anticipatory bail on being executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. They shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
3. They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
4. They shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer.
5. They shall mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer once in 15 days, till the charge sheet is filed.
6. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Chs* CT:HR Sd/- JUDGE