High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused No.1 in SC/ST Act Murder Case — Prima Facie Case Not Made Out Under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act as Ingredients of Public View and Intent Not Established.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shankarappa, accused No.1 in Spl.S.C.No.85/2019 arising out of Crime No.232/2019 of Chintamani Rural Police Station, filed a criminal petition under Section 439 CrPC seeking bail. He was charge-sheeted along with two others for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 363, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. The allegations were that the petitioner, though married, contracted a second marriage with the victim Padmavathi, and later the victim was murdered. The petitioner had been in custody since 12.12.2019. The court considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. The court noted that the allegations under the SC/ST Act were not prima facie made out because the incident did not occur in public view and there was no evidence of the petitioner insulting or intimidating the victim with intent to humiliate on caste basis. The court also observed that the petitioner had been in custody for about seven months and that the trial was likely to take time. Therefore, the court granted bail to the petitioner on certain conditions, including executing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, appearing before the court regularly, not tampering with evidence, and not leaving the jurisdiction without prior permission.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - Petitioner/accused No.1 sought bail in a case registered for offences under Sections 120B, 363, 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 - Court held that the allegations under the SC/ST Act were not prima facie made out as the incident did not occur in public view and there was no evidence of caste-based insult - Bail granted subject to conditions (Paras 2-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner/accused No.1 is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC in a case involving offences under IPC and SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the bail petition and directed the petitioner to be released on bail subject to conditions: executing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, appearing before the court regularly, not tampering with evidence, and not leaving the jurisdiction without prior permission.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Prima facie case
  • SC/ST Act ingredients
  • Section 439 CrPC
  • Murder
  • Abduction
  • Criminal conspiracy
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 178

Criminal Petition No.2888/2020

2020-07-10

K.S. Mudagal

Siddharth B. Muchandi, R.D. Renukaradhya

Shankarappa

State of Karnataka and Smt. Gangamma

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail petition under Section 439 CrPC

Remedy Sought

Petitioner/accused No.1 sought enlargement on bail in Crime No.232/2019 (Spl.S.C.No.85/2019) of Chintamani Rural Police Station

Filing Reason

Petitioner was in custody since 12.12.2019 and alleged that the offences under SC/ST Act were not prima facie made out

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC? Whether the allegations under the SC/ST Act are prima facie made out?

Submissions/Arguments

Learned counsel for petitioner argued that the ingredients of SC/ST Act are not attracted as the incident did not occur in public view and there was no caste-based insult. Learned HCGP opposed the bail petition.

Ratio Decidendi

For offences under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, the incident must occur in public view and there must be intent to humiliate on caste basis. Since these ingredients were not prima facie made out, the petitioner was entitled to bail.

Judgment Excerpts

Petitioner is accused No.1 in Spl.S.C.No.85/2019 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura arising out of Crime No.232/2019 of Chintamani Rural Police Station. It was alleged that the petitioner though married contracted second marriage with victim Padmavathi and couple... The allegations under the SC/ST Act are not prima facie made out as the incident did not occur in public view and there is no evidence of caste-based insult.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 439 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru seeking bail in Crime No.232/2019 (Spl.S.C.No.85/2019) of Chintamani Rural Police Station. The petition was heard on 10.07.2020 and allowed.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 120B, 363, 302, 201, 34
  • Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015: 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Process Against Wife in Cheque Dishonour Case for Professional Fees — No Vicarious Liability Without Specific Role in Issuance of Cheque. The court held that under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instru...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused No.1 in SC/ST Act Murder Case — Prima Facie Case Not Made Out Under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act as Ingredients of Public View and Intent Not Established.