This criminal appeal challenging the rejection of an anticipatory bail petition was dismissed. The court held that prima facie material existed to show the appellant's involvement in caste-based atrocities, making the trial court's application of Section 18A of the SC/ST (POA) Act legally sound.
The criminal appeal was dismissed.
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.
CRL.A.No.149/2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.149/2022
BETWEEN :
SRI. B.D. NIRANJAN AGED 36 YEARS S/O DHARMAPPA R/OF SHANTHALLI VILLAGE AND POST – 571 236 SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.JAGADISH BALIGA N., ADVOCATE)
AND
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001
CRL.A.No.149/2022
2
MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.340/2021 OF SOMWARPET POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 326, 504 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) AND 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI AND DIRECT THE APPELLANT TO BE ENLARGED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON HIS ARREST OR ON SURRENDER IN CRIME NO.128/2021 OF THE SOMWARPET POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 326, 504 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S) AND 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the rejection of his anticipatory bail petition, accused No.1 in Crime No.128/2021 of Somwarpet Police Station has preferred the above appeal.
CRL.A.No.149/2022
3
Sections 324, 326, 504 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(2) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’).
CRL.A.No.149/2022
4
anticipatory bail and there was prima facie material to show the involvement of the appellant in the case.
containing copies of the wound certificate of the victim.
the light of the statement of the complainant, the trial
CRL.A.No.149/2022
5
Court has rightly observed that prima facie case attracts provision of Section 18A of the Act. Having regard to the material on record and the other facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the trial Court committed error in exercising its discretion to reject the anticipatory bail petition. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
pgg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the anticipatory bail petition under Section 18A of the SC/ST (POA) Act given the prima facie material.
Whether the injuries sustained by the victim attract provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri. B.D. Niranjan
The State of Karnataka
Sri. T.J. Praveen
K.S. Mudagal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
