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