2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 51127
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100110/2022
BETWEEN:
MALIGERA PEERSAB ALIAS PEERASAB
S/O HONNURSAB
AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER
R/O.M. THUMBARAGUDDI VILLAGE,
TQ. SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI
...APPELLANT.
(BY SHRI AMAREGOUDA M, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
1. THE STATE REP. BY THE P.S.I
GUDEKOTE POLICE STATION,
TQ. SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI
REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD
2. KUM. OMAKSHI D/O. PALAPPA
AGE. 18 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. CHORANUR VILLAGE,
TQ.SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI.
…RESPONDENTS.
(BY SMT.GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP.)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(2) OF
THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION
2
OF ATROCITIES) ACT, SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON
BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.980/2021, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BALLARI,
REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 302, 201, 120B, 109, 114 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF
IPC AND UNDER SECTION 3(2)(V) OF SCHEDULE CASTES AND
SCHEDULE TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT
ACT, 2015, ARISING OUT OF GUDEKOTE POLICE STATION CRIME
NO.87/2021 DATED 01.08.2021, ETC.,.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused no.1
under section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (‘the Act’
for short), challenging the order dated 21.12.2021, passed
by the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, in
Spl.C.No.980/2021, rejecting his bail petition and seeking
to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in the event of his
arrest in the said case which is arising out of Crime
No.87/2021 of Gudekote Police Station, Ballari, registered
for the offences punishable under sections 302, 201, 120B,
109, 114, read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, and under section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes
3
and
Scheduled
Tribes
(Prevention
of
Atrocities)
Amendment Act, 2015.
2.
On the basis of the complaint lodged by one
Omakshi, who is the daughter of sister of deceased, lodged
a complaint on 1.8.2021 stating that the deceased
Shanmukappa and accused no.2 Lakshmi are the husband
and wife, they have got four children. It is alleged that
Shanmukappa was as a cleaner. At that time accused no.1
Peersab, the driver of lorry used to take him for lunch and
when he was not in the house, accused no.1 used to visit
his house and used to visit Lakshmi. It is alleged that the
said Lakshmi has got illicit relationship with Peersab. The
said
Peersab
was
talking
with
Lakshmi.
The
said
Shanmukappa warned and asked her stating that why she
is talking with Peersab and what is her relationship.
Lakshmi used to inform the same to Peersab. It is further
contended that on 22.7.2021 at 5.30 p.m. Shanmukappa
received a call to his mobile wherein some person was
speaking in Muslims speaking Language and she found that
the said Shanmukappa left house and at that time Peersab
4
and another person were standing at some distance to
their house and they took Shanmukappa along with them.
Then on 23.7.2021 evening she heard Lakshmi talking with
someone over phone informing to throw the dead body in
the tank. When this complainant went near hear her, she
disconnected the phone. As the said Shanmukappa did not
return for 3-4 days, on 26.7.2021 one Honnurswamy came
there and shown a photo of dead body. The son of
Shanmukappa identified the photo as that of his father.
But the said Lakshmi threatened the son also. Then on
1.8.2021 they were called to the police station to identify
the clothes of the dead body. Accordingly herself,
Bhimakka and grandmother Marekka went to the police
station and found the clothes of the deceased belongs to
Shanmukappa.
They
also
saw
photos.
Therefore,
complainant lodged a complaint stating that accused Nos.1
and 2 by colluding with each other and having illicit
relationship,
decided
to
eliminate
the
deceased.
Accordingly, the complaint came to be registered against
the said Peersab and Laxmi and another friend. Thereafter,
accused were arrested on 01.08.2021 itself. The accused
5
gave
voluntary
statement,
led
the
panchas
and
investigating
officer
and
produced
the
incriminating
material. The statements of the witnesses were recorded
and charge sheet came to be filed against accused Nos.1
to 3 for the above said offences. The bail petition of
accused Nos.1 and 3 came to be rejected by the learned I
Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari. Hence, this
appeal is filed.
3.
Heard Shri. Amaregouda M., learned counsel
for the appellant and Smt. Girija Hiremath, learned HCGP
for respondent-State.
4.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that
appellant is innocent and he has not committed any
offence.
It
is
further
contended
that
though
the
Shanmukhappa left the house on 22.7.2021, but the no
complaint was lodged. If at all, the complainant has heard
the Laxmi-accused No.2 talking with someone and asking
him to dispose of the body in a tank and even if she has
seen the photo, there was an ample opportunity for the
first informant to lodge the complaint, but no complaint
6
was lodged by her till 01.08.2021. This is also not
explained. There are no eye witnesses to the inci