Allowed

Mohammed Bilal S/O Ladu Sab v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jul 2020CRL.P/100595/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for petitioners accused of offences under IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act. The Court held that Section 18A bar did not apply due to vague overt acts and simple injuries.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear before IO within 15 days as instructed. Granted bail upon furnishing bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and providing two sureties for same amount, appearing as required, cooperating

Mohammed Bilal S/O Ladu Sab Vs the State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2020

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G NIJAGANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100595/2020

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MOHAMMED BILAL S/O LADU SAB AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: VARADAPURA VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT.

¶8

MOHAMMED YUSUF S/O LADU SAB, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: VARADAPURA VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT.

¶9

SMT.RUKSANA W/O KASIM PEERA AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: WARD NO.5, NEHARU COLONY, H.B. HALLI, BALLARI DISTRICT. ... PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI ARUN L.NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARIYAMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION, M.M. HALLI, BALLARI DISTRICT, THROUGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.

¶12

... RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL

¶15

¶16

IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH MARIYAMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION CRIME NO.127/2019 BY THE RESPONDENT, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 R/W SEC.149 OF IPC AND U/SEC.3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) OF SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PENDING TRIAL OF THE SAID CASE AS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.2, 4 AND 6/PETITIONERS, ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMED FIT TO BE IMPOSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶17

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

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail for release of the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.127/2019 of

¶20

Mariyammanahalli Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 R/W 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶21

¶22

The facts briefly stated in the petition

¶23

are that on the complaint filed by one injured victim by name N.Krishna s/o Venkateshappa, the police have registered the case. The allegations are that the complainant’s friend by name Kasim Peera requested him to come for panchayath settlement of the dispute between himself and his wife. Therefore, the complainant along with few others went to Varadapura on three motorcycles. While having settlement talks, there was a quarrel between both groups, then the accused persons abused the complainant and others who had come for panchayath in a filthy language and also taking their caste name. Then they have tried to assault and have also caused threat. The complainant has lost his gold chain, mobile and cash of Rs.14,000/-. The accused persons with an intention to commit the murder have

¶24

¶25

assaulted them with the iron rod handle of the

¶26

axe and have also abused them by taking the caste name.

¶27

After registering the case, the police have arrested accused No.1 and 3 and making attempts to arrest the petitioners who have been arrayed as accused No.2, 4 and 6. The bail petition filed by the petitioners before the Sessions Court was rejected.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the

¶29

respondent-State. Perused the records.

¶30

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitionersaccused had no premeditation either to assault the complainant and other persons or to abuse

¶31

the persons who had come for panchayath settlement. There was only verbal altercation

¶32

¶33

while discussing about settlement. There are no specific allegations that these petitioners alone have abused or assaulted the complainant and the persons of his group. The allegations are very vague and they do not indicate the specific overt-acts done by these petitioners. The police officials are making attempts to arrest the petitioners. In the event of their arrest, they will be put to great hardship.

¶34

Per contra, the learned HCGP

¶35

submitted that these petitioners have abused and assaulted the complainant and others while discussing about the settlement of family dispute of Kasim Peera with his wife. In view of the provisions of Section 18A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, bail petition is not maintainable. The petitioners are absconding. In

¶36

¶37

the event of granting bail, they are likely to interfere with the investigation.

¶38

Having regard to the submission made

¶39

by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP, this Court has gone through the complaint averments and the medical records. As could be seen from the complaint averments, there are no specific allegations regarding the overt-acts done by these petitioners. It is only stated that all accused persons have collectively abused the complainant and the persons of his group by taking the caste name and have assaulted. The medical records disclose that the injuries caused to the victims are simple in nature. Under these circumstances, the bar under Section 18A of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes

¶40

¶41

(Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989, not

¶42

applicable.

¶43

In a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court

¶44

reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre V/s State of Maharashtra and others, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that one of the parameters that can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail is frivolity in prosecution which should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. In the

¶45

event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail. While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors namely, no prejudice

¶46

¶47

should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused. Generally, arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arrest of the accused is imperative in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶48

The grounds stated in the petition and submission of the learned counsel indicates the apprehension of the petitioners regarding their arrest and detention.

¶49

The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event of granting bail, the accused are likely to abscond and interfere with the investigation. The said objection may be set right by imposing stringent conditions.

¶50

¶51

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting bail, subject to certain terms and conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following :

¶52

ORDER

¶53

The criminal petition is allowed.

¶54

The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station within fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and on their appearance, the Investigating Officer shall interrogate the petitioners and enlarge them on bail on the same day subject to the following conditions:

¶55