R. RAVIKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that though offence under Ss. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(5a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance 2014 and Ss. 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 is invoked against the appellant, the only allegation against the this appellant is that he was called after the incident and omnibus allegation against the appellant is that he also joined along with other accused and except the said allegation, nothing is found in the complaint that he abused taking the caste name with an intention to humiliate the complainant in the presence of the general public. Hence, he is entitled for anticipatory bail.

(3.) Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State would submit that in the complaint, specific allegation is made that he took caste name and abused the complainant and specific allegation against this appellant is that he was called to the spot where quarrel had taken place and he also assaulted his hands and legs and that he was a part of assault made against the complainant. Hence, the appellant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.