The High Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, agreeing that a bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (PoA) Act applied. Instead, it directed the trial court to expedite the petition's regular bail application to prevent injustice to a policeman facing judicial custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.15146 OF 2013
BETWEEN : Sandeep, S/o. T.R. Shankreppa, Aged 29 years, Occupation: P.C.No.856 in Wadi Police Station, Taluk: Chittapur, District: Gulbarga, Resident of Sakrebail, District: Shimoga. … PETITIONER. (By Shri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate)
AND:
The State, Through Wadi Police Station, Taluk: Chittapur, District: Gulbarga. … RESPONDENT. (By Shri Sanjay A. Patil, Additional State Public Prosecutor)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to allow the criminal petition and further order that the petitioner, in the event of his arrest be released on bail in Crime No.160/2012 of Wadi Police Station, Taluk: Chittapur, which is registered for the offence punishable under Section 376, 109, 34 of the IPC and 3(1)(xi)(2)(v)(vii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
This petition coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
under Sections 306 and 376 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’, for brevity) apart from offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xi) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’, for brevity).
3
been rejected by the lower court on the ground that there is a bar under Section 18 of the Act, for consideration of anticipatory bail, since there is a specific averment in the complaint as regards the offences punishable under the Act. This court would fully agree with the reasoning of the trial court in rejecting the bail petition for anticipatory bail.
4
in the event that the petitioner should approach the court below for regular bail, the court shall endeavor to expedite the consideration of the bail petition. With that observation, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE
msr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Whether the High Court can suo motu direct the trial court to expedite the consideration of a regular bail application by the accused who is a policeman.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sandeep
The State
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
