Allowed

Kottangada B Kariappa v. the State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC12 Dec 2014CRL.P/7700/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case registered for IPC offences and atrocity-related charges. The court noted prior complaints filed by the petitioner's family suggesting false implication and held it just to grant bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail by executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one solvent surety subject to conditions for regular attendance and non-interference with witnesses.

Kottangada B Kariappa Vs the State of Karnataka by — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRL.P.7700/2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7700/2014

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

KOTTANGADA.B.KARIAPPA, S/O LATE BEEMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O BALYAMANDOOR VILLAGE AND POST, VIRAJPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-517213.

¶10

... PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI PRABHUGOUDA.B.TUMBIGI, ADV.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SRIMANGALA POLICE STATION, KODAGU DISTRICT-571217.

¶14

... RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI B.VISWESWARAIAH, HCGP)

¶16

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.113/2014, REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE U/S 323, 506 OF IPC & U/S 3(1)(10), 3(15) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989. PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE COURT, MADIKERI, KODAGU DIST. IN THE EVENT OF ARREST OF THE PETITIONER.

¶17

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.P.7700/2014

-2-

ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in Cr.No.113/2014 of Srimangala Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(10) and 3(15) of SC and ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶22

The facts reveal that on 19.09.2014 at 3.00 p.m. when the complaint was proceeding on the public road in Balyamandoor village, it is alleged that the petitioner who was proceeding on the motor cycle stopped it near the complainant and threatened the complainant and his family members to leave the village within a month, failing with he would kill

¶23

them. Having said so he alighted and slapped on the cheek. He said to have abused the complainant as the person belongs to Vadda Community which is said to be a lower caste and said to have threatened to sell the property to him and having threatened danger to his life. In the circumstances, a complaint came to be

¶24

-3-

¶25

CRL.P.7700/2014

¶26

registered on the aforesaid facts and the petitioner is apprehending arrest.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for both the

¶28

parties.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶30

that the petitioner is innocent and he has not involved in such crime and that complaint filed is a counter blast for the complaint filed by himself and

¶31

members of his family against the complainant and members of his family. Therefore, he submits that provisions of SC and ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act are not applicable as there is no such material

¶32

against the petitioner and as the petitioner is falsely implicated has sought for grant of bail.

¶33

Learned HCGP objects the application and

¶34

submits that there is prima-facie material against

¶35

the petitioner for the offences under Sections 3(1)(10) and 3(15) of SC and ST (Prevention Of

¶36

-4-

¶37

CRL.P.7700/2014

¶38

Atrocities) Act and anticipatory bail cannot be granted in respect of such offences.

¶39

Perusal of the material placed on record reveals that earlier the family members of the petitioner have filed a complaint in respect of cutting 100 plants from the land of his brother and the complainant and his family members were said to be responsible for the theft of the plants. This complaint has been filed on 27.07.2014 and it came to be registered in Cr.No.96/2014 for the offences under Section 447, 427 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The brother of the petitioner had filed another complaint dated 27/07/2014 in Cr.No.97/2014. Thereafter, the present complaint has been filed. The possibility of false implication in view of the earlier complaints cannot be over ruled. It may be that there are false allegation against the petitioner under the provisions of SC and ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act and in the circumstances, it appears to be just and proper to grant anticipatory bail.

¶40

-5-

¶41

CRL.P.7700/2014

¶42

Consequently, the petition is allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Cr.No.113/2014 of Srimangala Police Station

¶43

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(10) and 3(15) of SC and ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989, he is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting Authority with further following conditions:

¶44

i) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-police within ten days from today.

¶45

ii) He shall attend the concerned Police Station on every Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m. until filing of the charge sheet.

¶46

iii) He shall not cause any threat, force, coercion or influence to any of the prosecution witnesses.

¶47

-6-

¶48

CRL.P.7700/2014

¶49

iv) If any of the above conditions are not followed by the petitioner, the Prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

Kottangada B Kariappa v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kottangada B Kariappa v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Shraddha Vs State by Mangalore South Police Station

Sri Nayaz @ Nayaz Pasha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Bande Manja @ H S Manjunath Vs State of Karnataka

K M Shivalingaiah Vs State by Sub-Inspector of Police

Ramesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Sarojabai Vs State of Karnataka