Dismissed

Tukaram S/O Amrut Mali v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Feb 2021CRL.P/100227/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash the charge sheet in a case involving alleged caste-based atrocities. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that materials in the charge sheet showed instigation and that a statement had been recorded, making the proceedings maintainable.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash FIR and further proceedings was dismissed.

Tukaram S/O Amrut Mali Vs State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT

¶6

CRL.P. NO.100227/2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

1 . TUKARAM S/O AMRUT MALI AGE ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NANDIKURULI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶9

2 . VITTAL S/O AMRUT MALI AGE ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NANDIKURULI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. ...PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI. K ANANDKUMAR, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAIBAG POLICE STATION, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶13

¶14

S.P.P. OFFICE, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD.

¶15

2 . KANCHANA W/O RAKESH KAMLE AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: ASHA KAREKARTHE, R/O: NANDIKURULI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP SANTOSH MALAGOUDAR, ADV. FOR R2)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND BE QUASH THE FIR NO.239/2017 AGAINST ACCUSED NOS.6 & 7, REGISTERED BY THE CASE RAIBAG POLICE STATION ANNEXURE-A, CRIME NO.239/2017 FOR THE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 323, 354(B) 504, 506, 109 R/W SECTIN 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(i)(s)(g), 3(I)(w)(i) & (ii)3(2)(va) OF SC/ST PA ACT 1989 AND AMENDMENT ACT 2015.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner are accused Nos.6 and 7 in the Special Case No.68/2018 on the file of the learned III Additional Special Judge, Belagavi, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 354(b), 504, 506, 109 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3(i)(s)(g), 3(i)(w)(i) & (ii), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶22

The prayer of the petitioners is that as against them the charge sheet filed is wholly groundless and therefore the charge sheet and further proceedings taken thereon are required to be quashed. The Criminal Case in crime No.239/2017 came to be registered in Raibag police station on the complaint of respondent No.2 herein. The gist of the complaint is that the family of the complainant has been cultivating the land in Survey No.237/1 of Nandikurali village under an agreement of sale from Siddappa Lakkappa Hirekurubara (Accused No.4) and the family of the complainant had given consideration amount also and accused No.1 was postponing executing the sale deed on one pretext or the other. The property was in the cultivation

¶23

¶24

of the complainant since more than 20 years and they had built their house in the said property and they had also buried the dead body of their relative and built a tomb on the same. They had also installed pipeline for irrigating the land. The further allegation in the complaint is to the effect that at the instigation of the present petitioners who are influential people in the village, the rest of the accused had come to the land in the occupation and cultivation of the complainant on 29/7/2017 with tractor No.KA-23-TC-0036 and thereafter, they started assaulting the complainant. It is alleged that the accused had abused the complainant with reference to her caste and threatened the complainant and others to vacate the land and go away. There is also allegation in the complaint that they had pulled the dress of the complainant and humiliated her in public. There are certain other allegations in the complaint that at that time, her husband, her mother-in-law and father-in-law and some others had come and rescued her. After investigation, the police have filed a charge sheet against several persons including the present petitioners.

¶25

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

¶27

vehemently contended that the allegation against the present petitioners is to the effect that they had only instigated and they were not present at the scene of occurrence. It is also contended by him that there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. He therefore submits that the charge sheet is required to be quashed.

¶28

The learned HCGP appearing for the State and learned counsel Sri. Santosh Malagoudar appearing for respondent No.2, per contra, contended that there are clear materials produced during the investigation in the charge sheet to the effect that the accused-petitioners had instigated the rest of the accused for the commission of the offences and the offences being under the provision of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which is enacted in order to prevent atrocity being committed on the members of the schedule castes, allegations cannot be taken lightly and case cannot be quashed in the manner sought for by the petitioners.

¶29

¶30

It was also contended that the I.O. has specifically incorporated Section 109 of IPC, in view of the materials available in the charge sheet papers.

¶31

Perusal of the charge sheet papers disclose that there are materials to show that the complainant and members of her family were in possession and cultivation of the land of accused No.4 and they had also entered into an agreement of purchase of land with him and some consideration was also paid. There are also materials to suggest in the charge sheet papers that on the date of the alleged incident, at the instigation of the present petitioners, the accused had gone to the land and assaulted the complainant and made certain caste related abuse. The complainant had also given certain statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the learned JMFC, Raibag. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the charge sheet is wholly groundless. Besides, it is submitted at the Bar that the learned Special Judge, Belgaum, has already framed charges against the petitioners and rest of the accused and trial has commenced with the examination of the complainant. Taking into

¶32

¶33

consideration the above circumstances, I am of the view that no case is made out to quash the charge sheet and further proceedings before the learned Court below and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶34

The above petition is dismissed.

¶35

In view of the above order, IA 1/2018 does not survive for

¶36

consideration and accordingly, it is disposed of.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

Vmb

Tukaram S/O Amrut Mali v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tukaram S/O Amrut Mali v. State of Karnataka

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

Sri.Shivanand Veerabasappa Palled Vs the Sub Inspector of Excise

Sri.Shivananda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Vijayashri W/O Vadiraj Mannari Vs the State of Karnataka

R Baskaran Vs State of Karnataka by

Mr.Sudhakar Reddy S/O Late Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy Vs Mrs.Swetha W/O Sudhakar Reddy

Dayanand Jinnu Vs the State of Karnataka