The main legal point established is the requirement of clear evidence of abuse based on caste to invoke Section 18 of the SC/ST Act and the concurrent power of District Court and High Court under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C.

1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.190/2017 of University Police Station, Kalaburagi, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 354, 307, 336, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC and Under Section 3(I)(X) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. (For short 'SC/ST Act')

2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, on 5.6.2017 at about 8:30 PM when the petitioner Nos.3 and 6 had picked up quarrel with the cousin of the complainant near Badiger Katti, the complainant had pacified the quarrel. On the same day at about 10:00 PM when the complainant was speaking with few members of the community near village entrance, at that juncture petitioners along with other 20 to 25 members came by constituting into an unlawful assembly by holding sticks, stones and started abusing the complainant in filthy language and also abused the complainant by taking the name of caste. When the complainant obstructed the petitioners from going to the graveyard, at that time, petitioners assaulted the complainant. When the complainant and his men tried to escape, accused persons hurled stones against them, due to the said impact a stone was hit to the stomach portion of the complainant and a contusion was caused. Immediately, thereafter two ladies intervened and pacified the said galata. At that time, accused No.1 dragged the lady, kicked her and caused a contusion. Accused No.3 abused in filthy language and assaulted with stick on the right leg and thereby caused grievous injuries and when the petitioners were making life attempt on the complainant party, other members of the village timely rescued the complainant party. At that point of time, petitioners have threatened the complainant with dire consequences. Thereafter, the complainant went to the Government hospital for treatment and thereafter lodged a police complaint.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State.

4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners are that the petitioners are innocent and they have falsely implicated in this case. He would further contend that a counter case has been registered by the petitioners against the complainant in Crime No.191/2017. He would further contend that the complainant has assaulted the petitioners and was intending to take away their lives. He would further contend that the provisions of SC/ST Act have been invoked only with an intention to harass the petitioners. He would further contend that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners are from respectable family. It is further contended that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they are ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and they are ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.

5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State vehemently contended that the petitioners have not approached the jurisdictional District Court for obtaining bail and have directly approached this Court without exhausting efficacious remedy. He would further contend that petitioners have committed offences under SC/ST Act and there is a bar to grant anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act. He would further contend that the complaint clearly goes to show that accused persons have abused by taking the name of the caste and they have assaulted the complainant and other two ladies besides causing grievous injuries. He would further contend that investigation is still under progress and if at this juncture, if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence, they may abscond and they may not be available for trial. On these ground