MANJUNATHA ACHARI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the complainant is a auto-rickshaw driver and that on 9/1/2025 at about 6.45 p.m., one Smt. Malini called over the phone for auto-rickshaw and engaged the auto-rickshaw to go to Tenkanidiyuru to bring the fish. At that time, the accused persons came and abused and also assaulted him with their hands on his cheek and also assaulted with stone and this appellant apart from assaulting, torn the clothes as well as abused in a filthy language and referred that he belongs to a lower caste and he will not allow him to live and hence complaint is lodged against the appellant and others.

(3.) Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State would submit that the appellant abused in a filthy language, but not taken out the specific caste name.