JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by appellant–accused No.1 praying to set aside the order dated 22.09.23 passed in Crl.Misc.No.591/2023 by the First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur, whereunder the anticipatory bail petition of this appellant–accused No.1 sought in respect of crime No.102/2023 of Shidlagathatta Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short hereinafter referred to as `IPC’) and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short hereinafter referred to as `SC and ST Act’), came to be rejected.

2. Heard learned counsel for appellant–accused No.1, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned HCGP for respondent No.1.

3. Respondent No.2 has filed complaint stating that on 03.09.2023 at about 2.20 p.m. he and his relative one Sri Mani were proceeding in the motor cycle towards shopping to bring materials for the naming ceremony of the son of the Mani and vehicles parked in front of the house of the appellant/accused No.1. When respondent No.2 asked to appellant to shift those vehicles, he shifted vehicles from the road and abused touching the caste of respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 questioned the act of the appellant/accused No.1, appellant/accused No.1 once again abused touching caste of the respondent No.2. At that time other accused persons picked up quarrel with respondent No.2 and assaulted on his head with wooden re-piece and caused bleeding injuries. The said complaint came to be registered in crime No.102/2023 of Shidlaghatta Town Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC and ST Act. The appellant/accused No.1 along with other accused persons have filed Crl.Misc.No.591/2023 seeking anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail petition came to be rejected so far as this appellant/accused No.1 is concerned by the impugned order dated 22.09.2023, which is challenged in this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1 would contend that there is case and counter case. Mother of the appellant/accused No.1 has filed complaint which came to registered in Crime No.104/2023 of Shidlaghatta Town Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 143, 279, 448, 323, 354, 327, 504, 506, 149 of IPC. Wherein respondent No.2 is arrayed as accused No.2 and Mani is arrayed as accused No.1. He contends that there is no intention on the part of this appellant/accused No.1 in abusing the respondent No.2 taking his caste name. The averments of the complaint does not attracted offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC and ST Act. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to the appellant/accused No.1.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that that averments of the complaint established that this appellant/accused No.1 abused respondent No.2 taking his caste name. There is prima facie case against this appellant/accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC and ST Act. Therefore, the bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act is attracted. Considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition invoking bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that if appellant/accused No.1 is granted bail there is threat to respondent No.2. She further contended that there is prima facie case against this appellant/accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC and ST Act. The Trail Court has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition invoking bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act. With this, she prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

7. Having heard learned counsels for parties, this Court has peruse