SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 41938

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.100316/2022

BETWEEN:

1.

SRI. CHANNAGOUDA @ CHANNABASAVA

S/O. YOGAPPA KORI

AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST.

2.

SRI. VENKATESH

S/O. NAGAPPA UPPAR

AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST.

BOTH ARE R/O. NANDIHALLI,

TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583231.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.B. C. JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

(THROUGH KARATAGI P.S.),

REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

2

BENCH AT DHARWAD.

2.

SRI. DYAVANNA

S/O. HAVANNA,

AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,

R/O. NANDIHALLI,

TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583231.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1;

R2 - SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2)

OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY

BAIL AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE THE

APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2 ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL

IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.102/2022

REGISTERED IN KARATAGI POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR

THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 323,

324, 354(A), 395, 295, 307, 504, 506 READ WITH 149 OF IPC

AND UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2) (v-a) OF SC AND

ST

(POA)

ACT,

INSOFAR

AS

THESE

APPELLANTS

ARE

CONCERNED.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

3

This

appeal

is

filed

by

accused

Nos.1

and

challenging the order dated 21.06.2022 passed in Criminal

Miscellaneous No.505/2022 by learned Principal District

and Sessions Judge, Koppal, whereunder anticipatory bail

petition filed by appellants in Crime No.102/2022 of

Karatagi

Police

Station

registered

for

the

offences

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 295, 307, 323,

324, 354(A), 395, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the

Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 8IPC9, for

brevity) and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va)

of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act,1989 (hereinafter referred to as 8SC &

ST (POA) Act9, for brevity), came to be rejected so far as

these appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 are concerned.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1/State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2

4

has not chosen to appear either in-person or through

counsel.

3.

The

case

of

the

prosecution

is

that,

one

Dyavanna (respondent No.2) has filed the complaint

alleging that he is resident of Nandihalli village in

Karatagi Taluk and that on 21.05.2022 at about 8.30 p.m.

at Nandihalli village, appellants and other accused entered

into the colony of the complainant by forming an unlawful

assembly by holding deadly weapons like stones, clubs

etc., and assaulted the women and children who were in

their house and threw the utensils of their house outside

and also abused in filthy language. Appellants/accused

Nos.1 and 2 assaulted Shekarappa with club and iron rod

and snatched 2 tolas of gold chain from his neck and also

dragged Honnur by touching her body with an intention to

outrage her modesty and snatched her mangalsutra and

abused them touching their caste and torn their clothes.

In that incident 11 persons have sustained injuries whose

names

are

mentioned

in

the

complaint.

The

said

5

complaint came to be registered in Crime No.102/2022 of

Karatagi Police Station for the aforesaid offences. The

appellants are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in the FIR,

along with other accused filed Criminal Miscellaneous

No.505/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came

to be rejected so far these appellants are concerned by

order dated 21.06.2022 by learned Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Koppal and has been granted anticipatory

bail so far the other accused are concerned. The

appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 have challenged the said

order in the instant appeal.

4.

Learned

counsel

for

the

appellants

would

contend that in the said incident total 69 accused and

there is no specific overt acts alleged against each of the

accused and the allegation is omnibus. It is his further

submission that there is a counter complaint by one

Hanumesh

Timmareddy

Ammannaru

against

these

appellants and other accused persons which is registered

in Crime No.103/2022 by Karatagi Police Station for the

6

offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148,307,

323, 324, 354(A), 395, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of

IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of SC and

ST(POA) Act. It is his further submission that it is a

group clash between two groups and it is difficult to

ascertain overt act of each of the accused. Without

considering all these aspects, learned Sessions/Special

Judge has passed the impugned order which requires

interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to allow

the appeal.

5.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader would contends that in the alleged incident nine

persons have sustained injuries out of them four have

sustained grievous injuries. It is his further submission

that

there

is

a

specific

allegation

against

these

appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 in the complaint regarding

they abusing the complainant and Honnur touching their

caste and outraging her modesty. It is his further

submission that on seeing averments of the complaint, the

7

offences under the provisions of the SC and ST(POA) Act

clearl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top