High Court allowed criminal appeal filed by accused No.3 to set aside rejection of anticipatory bail. Court found no specific allegation of caste abuse and injury was simple, justifying bail release with conditions.
Appellant released on bail subject to personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with surety and other standard conditions.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100239 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
DINESH S/O ASHOK MOKASHI AGE:20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT R/O: KUMBAR MADU, BAGALKOTE TALUK AND DISTRICT BAGALKOTE - 587 101.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2023.06.29 13:21:31 +0530
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1 SRI KUSHAL N K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHARANABASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 14A(2) OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.04.2023 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOTE, IN CRIME MISC NO. 192/2023 AND COSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE APPELLANTS/ACUSED NO.3 IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY THE BAGALKOTE TOWN P.S. IN CRIME NO. 78/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506, R/W 149 OF I.P.C. AND SEC. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) AND 3(2)(va) OF S.C. S.T. (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING AT BENGALURU, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 31.08.2022 when the first informant was present in the Tonga stand, Bagalkote, the appellants/accused Nos.1 to 6 had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly in view of the enmity and picked up quarrel with the first informant and others and when the first informant intervened and advised the appellants not to pick up quarrel, the appellants left the spot by threatening the first informant and others. On the same day, at about 9:30pm when the first informant was present near Kumbar Madu cross, all the appellants came to the spot by forming themselves into an unlawful assembly and restrained the first informant and others. Appellant No.3 assaulted on the face of the first informant with a stump and abused him in filthy language touching his caste by taking his caste and due to the said assault, the first informant lost part of his tooth. Appellant No.1 assaulted one Shrishail Chenni with a stump
on his fore head. Appellant No.4 assaulted one Sagar with club. All the appellants assaulted the first informant and others with hands and legs and they altogether abused them touching the caste and threatened to kill them. The said complaint came to be registered in Bagalkote town Police Station Crime No.78/2022 for the aforesaid offences.
appeal came to be allowed insofar accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 6 are concerned and came to be rejected sofar as this appellant – accused No.3 is concerned. Thereafter, the appellant – accused No.3 filed Crl.Misc.No.192/2023 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by the
II Additional District and Sessions Court, Bagalkote by order dated 21.04.2023. The said order is challenged in this appeal.
assaulted the complainant and caused injury on his lip. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
the contentions raised by learned High Court Government Pleader and the reasons assigned by the Sessions Court in passing the impugned order.
is filed, the appellant accused No.3 is not required for custodial interrogation. The allegation of abuse of touching the caste by this appellant is omnibus allegation and there is no specific allegation against this appellant, of he abusing the complainant and others, touching their caste. Therefore, the bar contained under Section 3 of the SC/ST (POA) Act is not attracted. The offence alleged against the appellant is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The apprehension of the prosecution that, if the appellant – accused No.3 is granted anticipatory bail, there is threat to
the prosecution witnesses, can be met with by imposing stringent conditions.
ORDER
No.3 is allowed .
Sd/JUDGE
GH
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant has made out a valid ground for setting aside the impugned order rejecting anticipatory bail and granting the same.
Whether the bar under Section 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act applies to the appellant.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
DINESH
STATE OF KARNATAKA
PRAJWAL
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
