Karnataka High Court
O.V. Dinakar vs State By on 30 November, 2020
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7003/2020
BETWEEN :
O.V.Dinakar
S/o late Vijayan
Aged about 47 years
No.23, 7th Cross, Ayyappa Layout
Munnekollala, Bengaluru-560 037.
... Petitioner
(By Smt. Prameela Nesargi, Senior Counsel for
Sri Aravind Reddy H., Advocate)
AND :
1. State by
Marathahalli Police Station
Bengaluru City-560 037
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building, Ambedkar Veedhi,
Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Smt.Rekha Prakash W/o Prakash
Aged about 37 years
Hoysala Meadows
Panathur Main Road
Kalurappa Layout
Bengaluru-560 103.
... Respondents
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP for R1;
R2-Served unrepresented)
-2-
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
event of his arrest in Crime No.348/2020 of Marathahalli
Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences
punishable under Sections 504, 324, 506, 376 and 313 of
IPC Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w), 3(2)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v) of the
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sections 7, 8, 11(2)
and 12 of the POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders
'through Video Conference' this day, the Court made
the following:-
ORDER
This petition is filed by the accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in Crime No.348/2020 of Marathahalli Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 324, 313, 506, 420; Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; and Sections, 7 11(1) & (2) and 12 of POCSO Act.
2. I have heard Smt. Pramila Nesargi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Aravind Reddy H., learned counsel for the petitioner-accused virtually and Sri Mahesh Shetty, the learned HCGP for -3- respondent No.1-State. Though the notice has been served on the complainant, she has remained unrepresented.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the petitioner- accused was the friend of her father and since many years, he used to visit their family. As there was no support from her family to get of out the situation, she was forced to approach the petitioner-accused as he was most trusted in their family. Subsequently, the petitioner-accused started calling her frequently and used to talk casually. Subsequently, he started having sex talks, but she used to discourage him. He used to tell her that he is interested in her. When she refused, he stopped calling her for few days and again in the month of December, 2008, he called her to hockey club to meet and discuss about her previous issues. She met him and way back home and the petitioner-accused started physical thing in the car and she asked him to drop her then and there if he behaves in such a way.
-4-Subsequently, he dropped her to home. It is further alleged that on 7.1.2009 he called her to join him for shopping and while going back they went to a hotel, where he had physical contact with her. He also used to have physical contact in the parental house of the accused. When she told that she is going to reveal the said fact to his parents, he threatened her and when the complainant was staying in BTM Layout, the petitioner- accused used to have physical contact with her, so also in Shanthinikethan Flat. It is further alleged that four times she became pregnant and she got aborted. It is further alleged that the petitioner-accused used to tell her that he is loving her and he will look after well, he used to burn her body with cigarettes and he used to tell it is his habit. One day, he brought the gun, threatned and abused her by taking the name of her caste. It is further alleged that he was also having physical relationship with other women. He has taken an amount of Rs.5,24,413/- in the month of January 2020 but he did -5- not returned the said amount, thereby he cheated her. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the contents of the complaint clearly go to show that the petitioner and the complainant were having affair since 2008, but the complaint has been got registered in September, 2020, i.e., after 12 years of the incident. It is her further submission that no such incident has taken place as alleged by the complainant. It is her further submission that the wife of the petitioner-accused has filed a complaint and hence, the present complainant is filed in order to take revenge. It is her further submission that even if the alleged incident has taken place it is nothing but a consensual sex and not against the will of the of the complainant. It is her further submission that there are no allegations made so as to attract the provisions of of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and basic -6- ingredients of the said provisions are also not forthcoming in the contents of the complaint. It is her further submission that the provisions of POCSO Act are also not applicable and only with an intention to harass and to see that the petitioner-accused should not get the bail, the said complaint has been registered. It is her further submission that the alleged incident is a concocted and created story only to suit the case. It is her further submission that the petitioner-accused is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, she prayed to allow the petition.
5. Though the petition is seriously contested by the learned HCGP by contending that the statement of the daughter of the complainant clearly indicates that the petitioner-accused has tried to sexualy assault her, on going through the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. it does not contain any dates and no specific overt acts are alleged as against the petitioner-accused. -7- On close reading of the contents of the complaint it indicates that the alleged incident at the first instance started in the year 2008 and subsequently, she has moved along with the petitioner-accused and they had physical contact. Even the contents of the complaint also go to show that four times the complainant became pregnant and she got aborted. When there was no resistance that itself shows that it is a consensual sex. Taking into consideration of the fact that there is a long delay in filing the complaint and ingredients of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are not specific and it was not an intentional act, under such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner-accused is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner-accused is granted anticipatory bail. In the event of his arrest in Crime No.348/2020 of Marathahalli -8- Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 324, 313, 506, 420; Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; and Sections, 7 11(1) & (2) and 12 of POCSO Act, the petitioner herein is ordered to be released, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
ii) He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within twenty days from today, failing which the bail is liable to be cancelled.
iii) He shall co-operate with the Investigation as and when required.
iv) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.-9-
vi) If he violates any one of the conditions, the bail is liable to be cancelled.
Sd/-
JUDGE *ck/-