Allowed

Sri Venkatesh Gulwady Alias Tinku v. State by

Karnataka HC30 Sept 2024CRL.A/1671/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against the rejection of a prayer for anticipatory bail in a case involving assault and caste atrocity allegations. The High Court set aside the impugned order and enlarged the appellant on bail subject to various conditions.

What did the court decide?

The order dismissing the anticipatory bail petition is set aside. The appellant is enlarged on bail subject to conditions including execution of a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties, ap

Sri Venkatesh Gulwady Alias Tinku Vs State by — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1671 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. VENKATESH GULWADY @ TINKU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O. SRI. PRAKASH GULVADY, R/AT 'SRI VIGNESHA', CHIKENSAL ROAD, KUNDAPURAKASAVA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT 576 201.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE BY KUNDAPURA POLICE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶14

SRI. SUDHEERAJ, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O NAGARAJ. K, R/AT KODERI, KIRIMANJESHWARA VILLAGE, BYNDOOR TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶18

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT BY GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.65/2024 FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 189(2), 191(2), 352, 115(2), 117(2), 190 OF BNS 2023 AND SEC. 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDED BILL 2015, REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE.

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that respondent No.2/defacto complainant has been served as per police report.

¶23

Memo along with copy of the police notice for having served notice on respondent No.2 is filed. The same is taken on record.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶26

Appellant is arraigned as an accused in Crime No.65/2024 of Kundapura police station registered for the offences punishable under Section 189(2), 191(2), 352, 115(2), 117(2), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short SC/CT (POA) Act).

¶27

Complaint is lodged by one Sudheer Raj son of K. Nagaraj in respect of an incident of assault which took place near Hariprasad hotel, Vaderhobli village, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi on 21.07.2024 at about 10:15 am.

¶28

Initially case was registered against accused Nos.1 to 4 and 2 others.

¶29

Learned High Court Government Pleader has submitted that the charge sheet has been filed against three accused persons and the appellant and another accused are absconding.

¶30

The learned Session Judge vide order dated 30.08.2024, has dismissed the prayer for anticipatory bail

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶32

in respect of the appellant and another accused by name Sandesh. In so far as accused No.3 is concerned, he was granted anticipatory bail.

¶33

The appellant has preferred this appeal to set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge in so far as rejecting his anticipatory bail petition and consequently, to enlarge him on bail.

¶34

The statement of the complainant / injured was recorded by the police at KMC hospital on 22.07.2024 at about 10:30 pm. It is stated that he along with his friend by name Roshan Kharvi Muski were proceeding in their Innova car from Nagur to Kundapura and after having their dinner they parked their car near one Hariprasad hotel. When they alighted from the car to bring beeda, 5 to 6 persons, who came out of Hariprasad bar and restaurant picked up quarrel with them, assaulted, kicked and also abused the complainant in filthy language referring to his caste etc.

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶36

Learned High Court Government Pleader has submitted that as per the wound certificate of the complainant, he has sustained about 5 injuries and as per the X ray report, he has sustained right femur shaft fracture and therefore, he has sustained grievous injuries. He contended that in view of the allegations against the accused persons that they have abused the complainant referring to his caste, the appellant herein is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶37

As per charge sheet, it was accused Nos.1 and 2 who initially picked up quarrel with one Keerthana (CW-7). When the complainant i.e., the injured and his friend by name Roshan Kharvi (CW.2) interfered and questioned them as to why they are assaulting him, both accused Nos.1 and 2 are alleged to have abused in filthy language and also assaulted with hands, kicked him etc. It is stated that accused No.3, appellant herein, who was inside the hotel also came and hit the complainant with hands.

¶38

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶39

Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the appellant is a habitual offender and there are several criminal cases registered against him and therefore, if he is enlarged on bail he may once again involve in committing similar offences.

¶40

The allegation against the appellant is that he has assaulted the complainant with his hands. It cannot be said that the complainant sustained grievous injuries on account of the assault by the appellant. He is arraigned as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. Omnibus allegations are made that accused have abused the complainant in filthy language referring to his caste etc. The learned Sessions Judge has granted anticipatory bail to one Divyananda, arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet. Considering the facts and circumstances, the relief sought by the appellant can be granted by imposing appropriate conditions. Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i) Appeal is allowed .

¶43

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶44

ii) Order dated 30.08.20224 passed in

¶45

Crl.Misc.707/2024 on the file of the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Udupi (sitting at Kundapura) in so far as dismissing the anticipatory bail petition of the appellant is set aside.

¶46

iii) Appellant / accused No.3 (as per charge sheet) in Crime No.65/2024 of Kundapura police station shall be released in the event of his arrest subject to following conditions.

¶47

a) He shall appear before the

¶48

Investigation Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for the likesum.

¶49

b) He shall furnish his correct address and shall inform the I.O / Court if there is change in the address.

¶50

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:40814 CRL.A No. 1671 of 2024

¶51

c) He shall not directly or indirectly make

¶52

any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuaded him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the concerned Investigation Officer.

¶53

d) He shall co-operate with the further investigation of the case, if any.

¶54

e) He shall not indulge himself in

¶55

committing any offence.

¶56

f) He shall appear before the Trial Court regularly.

¶57

Violation of the bail conditions shall result in cancellation of this order.

¶58

Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE