The absence of a prima facie case for caste-based assault under the Atrocities Act led to the granting of anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal filed under sec. 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short hereina fter referred to as 'the Atrocities Act') challenging the order dtd. 20/8/2022 in Crl. Misc. 830/2022 on the file of Special, 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga. The appellant applied for anticipatory bail under sec. 438 Cr.P.C and since the said application stood dismissed by the impugned order, this appeal has been preferred.

2. Heard Sri Gopalakrishnamurthy, learned counsel for the appellant and the High Court Government Pleader. It is reported by the High Court Government Pleader that notice has been served on the mother of respondent No.2, but there is no representation from him .

3. The appellant applied for anticipatory bail in relation to FIR in Crime No. 151/2022 for the offences punishable under Sec. 323, 307 , 341, 504, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3(1)(r), (s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of the Atrocities Act. Report was made by the second respondent to the police stating that on 26 .7.2022 at 1.00 AM he unloaded the chickens at a shop in the mutton market, Hiriyur and when he came near Sagar Reddy Hotel, he was intercepted by the appellant who was driving a car. The appellant alighted from the car and asked the second respondent about his identity. When the second respondent disclosed his identity, suddenly the appellant started abusing him in the name of his caste and assaulted him. It is alleged that the appellant brought a knife and tried to inflict injuries on his neck. At that time one autorickshaw driver interfered to pacify the situation .

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the entire incident is false . It was the second respondent who picked up quarrel with the appellant. FIR in Crime No . 152/2022 clearly shows that the second respondent tried to dash his lorry to the appellant for the purpose of killing him at the instance of one Prabhakar. In this view, the entire incident as reported to the police by the second respondent is not believable . The appellant is always available for investigation if at all his presence is necessary. The trial court has wrongly applied sec. 18 o f the Atrocities Act for denying anticipatory bail and therefore he argues for allowing the appeal.

5. On the other hand , the High Court Government Pleader opposes bail by submitting that the second respondent's complaint was the first one, complaint lodged by the appellant was subsequent. It is a case of 307, therefore anticipatory bail cannot be granted till investigation is over.

6. I have perused both the FIRs. It appears that there was enmity between the appellant and Prabhakar. This could be the reason for the incident to take place . Even though the second respondent has stated that his caste name was taken at the time of incident, at this stage it is difficult to infer that the incident took place in the background of caste . Thus viewed, sec. 18 of the Atrocities Act is not applicable . Although FIR was registered for the of fence under sec. 307 IPC, the counter FIR lodged by the appellant also indicates that the second respondent tried to drive his lorry on the appellant. The medical certificate shows that injuries are also simple in nature. In this view, I do not find existence of prima facie case. The appellant has made out a reasonable apprehension of his being arrested. His presence could be secured for investigation purpose. Therefore appeal deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following : -

ORDER

(a) Appeal is allowed.

(b) The order dated 20.8 .2022 in Crl. Misc. 830/2022 on the file of Special, 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga is set aside .

(c) In the event of arrest of the appellant by the first respondent police in connection with Crime No.151/2022 , he shall be released on bail subject to his executing a bond for Rs.1,00 ,000.00 and providing two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer. The appel