Allowed

Arun Kumar R v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC23 Nov 2024CRL.A/1973/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act against rejection of bail to accused Nos.2 and 3 in a murder and atrocities case arising from a land dispute. The court found no specific overt act in witness statements, noted parity with other bailed accused, allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned orders and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to appellants-accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.14/2024 on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 each with one surety, subject to conditions; impugned orders set aside.

Arun Kumar R Vs State of Karnataka by — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1973 OF 2024

¶8

C/W

¶9

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1977 OF 2024

¶10

IN CRL.A No. 1973/2024

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

ARUN KUMAR R AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS S/O RAVI R/A VALMIKI BHAVANA BACKSIDE GOKHARE TOTA, DEVANAHALLI TOWN BANGALORE RURAL BANGALORE – 562 110.

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI M S SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. VANDANA P L, ADVOCATE)

¶15

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANNARAYAPATNA PS REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGAOLORE – 560 001.

¶18

MR. PRAVEEN C.N AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O NAGARAJ, CHANNAHALLI VILLAGE, CHNNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶20

¶21

BANGALORE DISTRICT- 562 135.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 SRI C H DODDEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AT BENGALURU IN SPL.C.No.344/2024 DATED 26.09.2024 AND RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL VIDE ANNEXURE-D ARISING OUT OF CR.No.14/2024 DATED 31.01.2024 OF CHANNARAYAPATNA P.S. FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s),3(2)(5) OF SC/ST ACT ARRAIGNING THE PRESENT APPELLANT AS ACCUSED No.3 AND ETC.,

¶25

IN CRL.A No. 1977/2024

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

MR. YASHWANTH G AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS S/O MR GOPAL PUTTAPPANA STREET 20^TH WARD, DEVANAHALLI DEVANALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL BANGALORE – 562 110.

¶28

...APPELLANT (BY SRI M S SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. VANDANA P L, ADVOCATE)

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶30

AND:

¶31

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANANRAYAPATNA PS REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶32

MR. PRAVEEN C N AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O NAGARAJ CHANNAHALLI VILLAGE CHNNARAYAPATTNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT – 562 135.

¶33

...RESPONDENTS

¶34

(BY SRI K NAGESHWAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 SRI C H DODDEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶35

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT AT BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.No.1331/2024 DATED 26.06.2024 VIDE ANNEXUREC IN SPL.C.No.344/2024 AND RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL ARISING OUT OF CR.No.0014/2024 DATED 31.01.2024 OF CHANNARAYAPATNA P.S. FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(5) SC/ST ACT AND ETC.,

¶36

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶37

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶39

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶40

Crl.A.No.1973/2024 is filed by appellant –accused No.3 praying to set aside the order dated 26.09.2024 passed in SPl.C.No.344/2024 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.

¶41

Crl.A.No.1977/2024 is filed by the appellant –

¶42

accused No.2 praying to set aside the order dated 26.06.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1330/2024 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.

¶43

In both impugned orders, bail petitions filed by appellants –accused Nos.2 and 3 in respect of Crime No. 14/2024 of Channarayapatna Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 120B, 323, 324, 302, 307, 354, 504 and 506 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC” for brevity) and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)

¶44

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶45

and 3(2)(v-f) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “SC and ST Act” for brevity) came to be rejected.

¶46

Heard learned Senior Counsel for appellants – accused Nos. 2 and 3, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State.

¶47

It is the case of the prosecution that CW8 – Sri.Narayana Swamy is the owner of Sy.No.77 and he agreed to sell 10 guntas of land out of 1 acre 10 guntas of

¶48

land to accused No.11 for a sum of Rs.12,85,000/- and received an advance amount of Rs.3,15,000/-. Thereafter, a substantial portion of the land in Sy.No.77 is acquired for formation of road and CW8 has not executed a registered sale deed and agreed to return the advance amount to accused No.11. That, on 31.01.2024 at 9.30 am, CW8 was digging the bore well in his land. Accused Nos.1 and 11 came there and raised objection for such

¶49

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶50

digging of bore well in the said land and CW8 did not stop digging of the bore well. Accused Nos.1, 11 to 13 called accused Nos.2 to 10 near Toll Plaza and hatched criminal conspiracy and accused Nos.1, 11 to 13 abetted the other accused to make galata to stop the bore well work and to commit the offences against CW8 and his family members. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 10 formed an unlawful assembly, accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 were holding deadly weapons like clubs and accused No.8 was holding chopper and they went to the land of CW8 at 10.30 am on 31.01.2024. Accused Nos.1 to 10 trespassed into Sy.No.77 to stop digging the borewell. At that time, CWs.1 to 9 and the deceased Sri.Sanjay raised objection and accused Nos.1 to 10 assaulted them and as a result, the deceased Sri.Sanjay sustained grievous bleeding injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 09.02.2024 in the hospital. CWs.1 and 5 sustained simple injuries and CWs.2, 4, 6 and 7 sustained grievous injuries. CW3 sustained simple as well as grievous injuries. A complaint came to be filed

¶51

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶52

in that regard. After investigation, charge sheet came to be filed for the aforesaid offences. These appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 are in judicial custody and they have filed bail petitions and same came to be rejected by impugned orders which are challenged in these appeals.

¶53

Learned Senior Counsel for appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 would contend that even though in Cl.No.17 of the charge sheet there is specific overtact alleged against these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 assaulting the deceased-Sanjay with club on his head, no injured witnesses or eye witnesses have stated the said specific overtact in their statements. In the statements of injured witnesses and eye witnesses there is only allegation of presence of these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 and other accused and they assaulting the injured – C.W.1 to 10 and deceased. He further submits that there are no statements of eye witnesses/injured witnesses accusing these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 specifically assaulting the deceased –Sanjay on his head

¶54

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶55

with club. Without considering all these aspects, learned

¶56

Special/Sessions has erred in rejecting their bail petitions. With these, he prays to allow appeals and grant bail to appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3.

¶57

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State would contend that there is specific allegation against these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 in Cl.No.17 of the charge sheet assaulting the deceased –Sanjay with club on his head. The deceased who has been assaulted on 31.01.2024 died in the hospital after 09 days i.e. on 09.02.2024. C.W. 1 to 10 are injured witnesses and C.W.11 to 13 are eye witnesses to the incident. Charge sheet materials shows prima facie case against these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3. With these, he prays for dismissal of appeals.

¶58

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would

¶59

contend that these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 were present on the spot and assaulted the deceased and injured. If these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 are

¶60

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶61

granted bail there is threat to the prosecution witnesses. With these, he prays for dismissal of appeals.

¶62

Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶63

perused the impugned orders and other materials on record.

¶64

On perusal of Cl.No.17 of the charge sheet there is specific overtact alleged against these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 assaulting the deceased –Sanjay with club on his head. On perusal of statements of C.W.1 to 10 and C.W.11 to 13 who have stated to be injured and eye witnesses, there is no specific overtact alleged against these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 assaulting the deceased –Sanjay with club on his head. The accusation in their statements is omnibus regarding presence of these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 and other accused and they assaulting the deceased. Learned Senior Counsel for appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 submitted that except these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3, other accused persons have been granted bail. As other accused persons

¶65

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶66

have been granted bail, these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 are also entitled for grant of bail as they are similarly placed to that of other accused. As charge sheet is filed these appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 are not required for custodial interrogation. The apprehension of the counsel for respondent No.2 is that if these appellants

¶67

– accused Nos.2 and 3 are granted bail they will threaten the prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. Appellants – accused Nos.2 and 3 have made out grounds for setting aside the impugned orders and grant of bail.

¶68

In the result, the following

¶69

ORDER

¶70

i) Appeals are allowed .

¶71

ii) The impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed in SPl.C.No.344/2024 and order dated 26.06.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1330/2024 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru are set aside.

¶72

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:47811 CRL.A No. 1973 of 2024 C/W CRL.A No. 1977 of 2024

¶73

iii) The appellants - accused Nos.2 and 3 are granted bail in Crime No.14/2024 of Channarayapatna Police Station, subject to the following conditions:

¶74

a) Appellants - accused Nos.2 and 3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶75