MAHENDRA S. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed under Sec. 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act ('SC/ ST Act ' for short), questioning the correctness of the order dtd. 16/9/2022 passed by the I Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crl.Misc.No.876/2022, rejecting the appellants' application under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C., for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.120/2022 registered by the first respondent police, for the offences punishable under Ss. 143 , 147 , 504 , 447 and 427 of IPC and Ss. 3(1)(r) , 3(1)(s) , 3(1)(f) , 3(1)(g) and 3(2) (v-a) of SC/ ST Act read with Sec. 149 of IPC. The appellants are accused 1 to 5 and 7 to 9.

(2.) Heard Sri Manjunath Prasad H N, learned counsel for the appellants and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1- State. Respondent No.2 is served with notice of this appeal, but he has not entered appearance either personally or through an advocate.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants Sri Manjunath Prasad H N brings to my notice the earlier order passed by this court on 19/10/2022 in Crl.A.No.1654/2022 and submits that the present FIR was registered in connection with the same incident. The court below rejected the appellants' application for anticipatory bail because the earlier application for anticipatory bail filed in connection with Crime No.112/2022 had been rejected. Actually both the FIRs pertain to same incident. The first FIR was filed by Dharani Kumar, the brother of present respondent No.2. Therefore it is his argument that the present appeal deserves to be allowed.