Manja Naik Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.06.2022 IN SPL.C.(SC/ST) NO.24/2020 ON THE FILE OF SPECIAL, 2^ND ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.

¶25

IN CRL.RP NO.1458/2022:

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

¶28

...PETITIONER

¶29

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP A/W. SMT. K.P.YASHODA, HCGP)

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶31

AND:

¶32

JAGADEESHA

¶33

S/O ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ACRECANUT BUSINESS, THIRUMPATHI TRADERS, R/O BHIMASAMUDRA HOBLI, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 520.

¶34

VINAY KUMAR S/O ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, ACRECANUT BUSINESS, THIRUPATHI TRADERS, R/O BHIMASAMUDRA HOBLI, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577520

¶35

...RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. SANTOSH S.NAGARALE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶37

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA IN SPL.C(SC/ST) NO.24/2020 DISCHARGING THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(I)(II) OF SC/ST ACT, AND DISMISS THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 227 OF CR.PC.

¶38

THIS APPEAL AND PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶42

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶43

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-complainant in criminal appeal and learned Additional SPP for petitioner-State in criminal revision petition and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2-accused.

¶44

The Criminal Appeal No.1739/2023 is filed by appellant-complainant and Criminal Revision Petition No.1458/2022 is filed by the petitioner-State to set aside the order dated 04.06.2022 in Spl.C.(SC/ST) No.24/2020 allowing the application filed under Section 227 Cr.P.C. in part, discharging accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence under Section 506 and Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

¶45

The factual matrix of the case of the complainant before the Trial Court by lodging the complainant before the police is that on 08.05.2020 at about 9.00 a.m., when the complainant, his aunt Rathna Bai and his uncle Sajyanaik were working in the land, respondent Nos.2 and 3, Jagadish Kumar and Vinay Kumar came in the Bolero Jeep bearing registration No.KA-16-M-5088 and abused the complainant in filthy

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶47

language by taking name of the caste as Sukali and Lambani. It is further alleged in the complaint that, Civil Court has passed decree in their favour, at that time, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 abused and said that, no Court can do anything to them. When Rathnai Bai and Poryanaik came for rescuing the complainant, at that time, respondent No.3 dragged Rathnabai by holding her clothes and respondent No.2 with an intention to do away the life has run over the Bolero Jeep on Poryanaik, due to hit by Bolero Jeep, Poryanaik sustained injuries and he was shifted to the hospital. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 threatened to do away their life and went back.

¶48

Based on the complaint, the police registered Crime No.145/2020 for the offence under Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (POA) Act and Sections 504, 307, 324, 323, 506 and 354B read with Section 34 IPC. The police after registration of the case, investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet and thereafter, an application is filed for discharge and Trial Court vide impugned order allowed the application in part and comes to the conclusion that no ingredients of offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) attracts and comes to the conclusion that there are material to proceed

¶49

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶50

against the accused under Sections 323, 354B and 504 IPC that charges can be framed against them. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant-complainant has filed the criminal appeal and the petitioner-State has filed the criminal revision petition contending that order passed by the Trial Court is erroneous and the very approach made by the Trial Court with regard to ingredients of the offences and interpretation by the Trial Court is erroneous and it requires interference of this Court.

¶51

Learned counsel appearing for the appellantcomplainant in the criminal and learned Additional SPP for the petitioner-State in the criminal revision petition brought to notice of this Court contents of the complaint, wherein it is specifically mentioned that accused took caste name and they came to land saying that they are having work to do and when the complainant’s mother-in-law tried to pacify the galata, abused taking their caste name and also dragged by holding her saree and assaulted the other witness and at the same time, the person, who was sitting in the Bolero vehicle abused taking caste name and also caused life threat and even made an attempt to take away life by moving Bolero vehicle, as a result, Poryanaik has sustained injuries and specific averments

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶53

7 -

¶54

are made in the complaint and as well as C.Ws.6 and 7 made the statement with regard to the incident is concerned and inspite of Trial Court taken note of averments made in the statement of C.Ws.6 and 7, extracted the same in paragraph No.13, but committed error in interpreting the same that it will not attract Section 3(1)(r) and also Section 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act and so also 3(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and it must be prima-facie made out that the accused must touch the woman belongs to SC/ST intentionally, knowing that she belongs to SC/ST and such act of touching must be of a sexual nature. Neither in further statement of the complainant nor in the statement of C.Ws.6 to 9, there is any averment that accused No.2 dragged the cloth of C.W.6 though there is a recital in the complaint in this regard. Hence, comes to the conclusion that ingredients of offence under Section 3(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act also not attracts and the very approach of the Trial Court is erroneous. Learned counsel also brought to notice of this Court the ingredients of the said to invoke the same.

¶55

Learned Additional SPP for the petitioner-State in

¶56

criminal revision petition pointed out that the accused person

¶57

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶58

dragged the complainant when she came to rescue holding her saree and tried to disrobe her clothes with an intention to humiliate her and the same was not taken note of by the Trial Court.

¶59

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2-accused would vehemently contend that the Trial Court in detail taken note of the allegation made in the chargesheet and also the statement of witness and same has been extracted in paragraph No.14 and even comes to the conclusion that there were no public, apart from the complainant and accused being present at the time of incident and the Trial Court rightly comes to the conclusion that Section 3(1)(r) and Section 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act will not attract. Even with regard to the offence under Section 3(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act also, detail discussion was made in paragraph No.17 that even in statement of C.Ws.7 and 8, it is recited that accused No.2 dragged her. On the other hand, in the statement of C.W.9, it is stated that C.Ws.1 and 6 were quarrelling with the accused and he pacified them, it will not attract Section 3(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and detailed discussion was made and not found any intentional act touching of a sexual

¶60

9 -

¶61

NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶62

nature, question of invoking Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) does not arise. Hence, definite finding was given by the Trial Court considering the material on record.

¶63

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant in

¶64

criminal appeal, learned Additional SPP for the State in the criminal revision petition and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2-accused, the points that would arise for consideration of this Court are:

¶65

(1) Whether the Trial Court committed an error in allowing the application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. in part and discharging accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence under Section 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and whether it requires interference?

¶66

(2) What order?

¶67

Point No.(1)

¶68

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant in criminal appeal, learned Additional SPP for the State in the criminal revision petition and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2-accused, this Court has already

¶69

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶70

narrated the factual aspects of the case while considering the matter. Having perused the complaint which is placed before this Court, the same is very clear with regard to the fact that there was dispute between the parties and reference was made with regard to deciding of case in favour of the complainant as well as taking of caste name Sukali and Lambani, but the incident of galata has taken place near the land and that too in the private land and except the complainant’s party and accused party, no public were present in the spot and with an intention to humiliate a person belongs to any particular caste, if any such abuse is made, then it attracts Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) and the Trial Court rightly comes to the conclusion that it will not attract Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s), in the absence of any general public being present at the time of incident. Admittedly, the place of incident is a private land and there is a civil dispute between the parties.

¶71

However, Trial Court failed to take note of the fact that a specific allegation is made in the complaint that with an intention to cause threat to the life, one of the accused moved Bolero vehicle and in the said course of action, Poryanaik sustained injury and Trial Court comes to the conclusion that

¶72

11 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶73

there are material to consider the offences under Sections 323, 354B and Section 504 IPC, since specific allegations are made abusing taking caste, but committed an error in coming to the conclusion that there are no ingredients under Section 506 IPC and when intimidation was caused by moving the vehicle, Trial Court ought to have taken note of said fact.

¶74

Apart from that, while considering the offence under Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) also, the Trial Court comes to the conclusion that there was no intentional act of touching a woman of a sexual nature. Having read, Section 3(1)(w)(i), the is same very clear that, if any act is done intentionally touching a woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to a Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe and the word used is ‘or’ and when such act of touching is of a sexual nature and is without the recipient’s consent, the Court has to take note of the word used intentionally touching a woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe knowing that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and with an intention to touch her with sexual nature and Section 3(1)(ii) is very clear uses words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature towards a woman belonging to a Scheduled

¶75

12 -

¶76

NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶77

Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.

¶78

The contents of the complaint is very clear that accused persons were fully aware that both belong to particular caste and even caste name is also uttered during the incident. Apart from that, specific allegation is also made that the accused dragged Rathnabai holding her cloth and subjected her for humiliation and assaulted her, when Rathnabail came forward to support, the other accused made an attempt to disrobe the clothes which comes within the purview of ingredients of Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and knowing fully well that they belong to particular community, touched her and dragged her and the Trial Court failed to take note of said fact into consideration while allowing the application in part, particularly the offence under Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and observation is made that though taken note of assault or use of criminal force to any woman with an intention to disrobing or complaining her to be naked, is required and also comes to a conclusion that the accused must touch the woman belonging to SC/ST intentionally knowing that she belongs to SC/ST and such act of touching must be of a sexual nature and Trial Court

¶79

13 - NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶80

failed to treat the very proviso of Section in toto and only concentrated that touching must be of a sexual in nature and the same cannot be a ground to come a conclusion that offence under Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) not attracts and the very reasoning given by the Trial Court is against the ingredients of the offences. Hence, it requires interference of this Court, particularly only in respect of offence under Section 506 as well as Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act. Therefore, I answer point No.(1) as ‘partly affirmative’.

¶81

Point No.(2)

¶82

In view of the discussion made above, I pass the

¶83

following:

¶84

ORDER

¶85

(i) The criminal appeal and criminal revision petition are allowed in part.

¶86

(ii) The order passed by the Trial Court in discharging the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence under Section 506 and Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act is hereby set aside. Consequently, the Trial Court is directed to proceed against respondent Nos.1 and 2- accused for the offence under Section 506 and

¶87

NC: 2025:KHC:13775 CRL.A No. 1739 of 2023 C/W CRL.RP No. 1458 of 2022

¶88

14 -

¶89

Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act frame charge against both of them.

¶90

Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶91

ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Manja Naik v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manja Naik v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Karnataka Vs Olwyn D Souza

Sri B R Siddaramu Vs Sri H M Ravi

Parameshwara Basri Vs the State by SP

Baby Kumari Vs the State

Sri Dhilipkumar Pari Vs State by the Indiranagar Police Station

Sri K P Boregowda @ Shashi Vs State of Karnataka