IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8773 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. Rangaswamaiah S/o Thimmanna, Aged about 34 years, 2. Jaganna, S/o Late Lakshmana, Aged about 35 years, 3. Srinivas S/o Doddathimmanna, Aged about 35 years, 4. Maranna S/o Bommanna Aged about 38 years, 5. Murkannappa S/o Bommanna Aged about 38 years, 6. Shashi @ Sheshagiri S/o Kariyanna Aged about 38 years, 7. Jayanna S/o Maranna, Aged about 36 years, All are residing at Kuntegowdanahalli Village, Kallabella Hobli, Sir Taluk, Tumakuru District-572 125.
… Petitioners (By Sri.Vikas Nagaiah C., Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Sira Police Station, Represented by SPP, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. ...Respondent (By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G., HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.PC praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.406/2019 of Sira Police Station, Tumakuru District for the offence punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 394 read with 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r) s) 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 has been filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 7 under Section 438 of Cr.PC to release them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.406/2018 of Sira P.S., for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 and 506 R/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (herein after referred as ‘the act’ for short).
2. Notice to complainant has been served but remained absent. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners-accused and learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
3. The genus of the complaint is that the complainant has given an application to the Tahsildar, Sira to grant 4 acres of land to him and his wife in Sy.No.61, 62 and 63 of Honnenahalli village. It is further stated that he and his family members enjoying the 8 acres of land since 1998. On 24.08.2018, at about 9.30 a.m., he along with his relatives came to the said land and at the time of cleaning the land, the accused persons came there by holding stones and abused them with filthy language by taking the name of their caste. Accused No.1 assaulted on the right side of the head of complainant’s son and caused bleeding injury and other accused persons by holding hairs of the complainant dragged him and kicked with legs and threatened that they will take away the life of the complainant if they get the said land. Immediately with the help of villagers, they went to hospital. The villagers said that they will convene panchayath in this regard. Hence, there is delay in filing the complaint.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that there were civil disputes and the said civil dispute has been converted into enmity and a case has been registered. He further submitted that except the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC, all other offences are bailable. He further submitted that the allegations which have been made against the accused persons with reference to taking the name of the caste are in genarised manner and are omnibus and as such the provisions of Section 18(A) of the Act are not attracted. He further submitted that the complainant trying to encroach upon the said land of the accused petitioners. Panchayath was also convened in this behalf, but the complainant did not appear. Further submitted that a complaint has been registered by the villagers against the complainant in crime No.408/2018, that itself clearly goes to show that it is the case under enmity. It is also further submitted that already charge sheet has been filed and the accused petitioners are ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions that may be imposed on them and also ready to offer sureties. Hence, he prays to allow the petition and to release the accused petitioners on bail.
5. Per contra learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that there is bar under Section 18(A) of the Act to release the accused petitioners on bail. The accused petitioners have abused the complainant and his family members by taking the name of the caste and if the accused petitioners are released on bail, they may again involve in similar type of activities. He further submitted that they are absconding since from the date of registration of the case. If they release on bail, again, they may abscond and may not face the trial. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records including the complaint.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint, it reveals that the other offences which have been leveled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and they are bailable, except the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC. The offences alleged are not so serious in nature. The only question which arises for consideration of this Court is, whether the accused petitioners are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. They have been charge sheeted under Section 3(1) of SC/ST Act. As could be seen from the contents of the complaint and other material, it clearly shows that the said allegations which have been made are in genarised manner and are omnibus allegations. The alleged incident has taken place on 24.08.2018 and the complaint came to be registered on 03.11.2018. There is inordinate delay in filing the complaint.
8. It is well settled principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dr.Subhas Kashinath Mahajan V/s State of Maharastra and another reported in 2018 (6) SCC 454 that there is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in case of Atrocities Act, if no prima facie case is made out and on judicial scrutiny, if the complaint is found to be prima facie not bonafide then, under such circumstance, the Court can grant anticipatory bail. When that being the case, the accused petitioners are also entitled for bail. The dispute is in respect of land bearing Sy.No.61, 62 and 63. Under the said fact and circumstance, I feel that the bar under Section 18(A) of the Act will not applicable to the present case on hand.
Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed and the petitioners-accused are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.406/2018 of Sira Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 and 506 R/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, subject to following conditions;
1. Each of the accused petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Laksh Only) with two sureties 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 leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
4. They shall mark their attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., till charge sheet is filed.
5. They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
6. They shall not indulge in similar type of activities.
Sd/- JUDGE PN/-