Sri. Lakshmikanth @ Kanthu vs The State of Karnataka

Anand Byrareddy, J.—The petitioner is accused along with seven others of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 504, 323, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the ''IPC, for brevity) and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Hereinafter referred to as the ''SC & ST Act'', for brevity). The petitioner claims that, even according to the complaint, there are no overt-acts alleged against the petitioner of any such offences, as alleged and certainly not an offence under the SC & ST Act. However, the application seeking anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner has been adjourned beyond the summer vacation by the court below, without considering the prayer of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is before this court.

While the learned Government Pleader would rightly point out that in an offence alleged under the SC & ST Act, the accused would not be entitled to anticipatory bail, as there is express bar under the SC & ST Act. To counter which, the petitioner would rely on a judgment of a division bench of this court in Sri N.B. Gungarakoppa and Others Vs. State of Karnataka, wherein while referring to the bar u/s 18 of the SC & ST Act, the division bench has, while conceding that the bar would apply, as consistently laid down by the Supreme Court and various other High Courts, in cases which fall u/s 3 of the Act, held that it would certainly not apply to situations in which the provisions of the Act have wrongly been invoked or where the facts do not justify it. Therefore, the. learned Counsel would submit that given the admitted circumstance, even from the tenor of the complaint, it could be seen that no case is made out against the petitioner insofar as the offence under the SC & ST Act and would seek enlargement on bail.

Since there are no overt-acts alleged against the petitioner of having committed any offence under the SC & ST Act, merely because the sections are invoked, it would not make out a case against the petitioner.

Hence, the petition is allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest, on furnishing a self bond in a sum of 25,000/- with a solvent surety for a likesum. The petitioner shall not try to influence or otherwise tamper with the prosecution evidence. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer. The petitioner shall attend the trial court on every date of hearing. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court, without the leave of the court.