Karnataka High Court
Sunil S/O Nagappa Ulavannavar vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 November, 2022
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30 t h DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103302/2022
BETWEEN:
SUNIL S/ O NA GAPPA ULAVANNAVAR
AGE. 21 YEARS , OCC. JCB DRIVER
R/O.MYAGERI ONI , UNKAL,
HUBBALLI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VASANT G. HOLEYANNAVAR, ADV OCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPT. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA
DHARWAD BEN CH, DHARWAD
P.I . VIDYANAGAR POLI CE STATION
HUBLI
... RES PONDENT
(BY SRI. PRAS HAN TH V. MOGA LI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO RELEASE OF THE PETI TIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL
IN VIDYANAGAR POLI CE STATION CRIME NO.120/ 2022 FOR
THE OFFENCE U/ S 506, 376, 417 OF IPC THE FIR AND
COMPLAINT ARE PENDING ON THE I ST ADDITION AL CIVIL
JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC COURT , HUBLI , AND KINDLY ALLOW
THIS BAIL PETITION.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE F OLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.120/2022 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Hubballi, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 376 and 417 of The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity).
2. The case of the prosecution is that, the victim girl has filed the complaint stating that, the family members of the petitioner/accused together with the petitioner came to the house of the complainant in order to see bride. The petitioner liked and given indication that he is ready to marry her. Accordingly, engagement was arranged between the complainant and the petitioner during October 2021. There was a meeting held on 02.04.2022 thereby with an understanding to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim 3 girl at the mass marriage going to be conducted at Unkal Sidappajji Temple, Hubballi etc,. and that the family of the petitioner did not start any activities for the celebration of marriage. Inbetween, the family of the petitioner started to deny the marriage of the complainant to their son. However, the petitioner came to the house of the complainant during the absence of her parents and he assured and promised her that he will marry her only and not to worry etc. and also apprised that he will not care to his family and their decision etc. Likewise, the petitioner came to the complainant during March or April of the same year in the absence of her mother and made to convince her and thereby with strong assurance that he will marry her only, had physical contact with her despite her unwillingness. In the month of July of the same year during the absence of mother of the complainant, the petitioner came to the house of the complainant and repeating the same assurance and inducing her, 4 forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. He had sexual intercourse with her on 4-5 occasions and he threatened not to inform to others otherwise he will not marry her. Thereafter, the complainant tried to contact the petitioner but he tried to avoid to meet or contact her. Therefore, the complainant and her mother went to the house of the petitioner, then the petitioner also started to deny to marry her and the petitioner and the family members started threatening the complainant and her mother and further warned them that if they came to their house they will finish them. After consulting with some elder persons, after their guidance and as per their instructions, she filed the complaint on 02.09.2022 against the petitioner. The said complaint came to be registered in Vidyanagar Police Station Crime No.120/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC. The petitioner came to be arrested on 24.09.2022 and he is in judicial custody. The petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.5471/2022 5 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, the alleged incident occurred during July 2022 and the complaint came to be filed on 23.09.2022 and there is a delay in filing the complaint. As per the history given by the petitioner/accused before the Doctor who examined him, there is love affair between the petitioner and the victim girl and they had physical contact twice a year back. It is his further submission that, the victim is aged 19 years and the alleged sexual intercourse between them is consensual. The Doctor, who examined the victim girl has noted that there are 6 no injuries and there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. As charge-sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that, the statement of the victim girl has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she has specifically stated the acts of the petitioner of cheating her and refusing to marry her and having sexual intercourse with her. It is his further submission that the Doctor, who examined the victim girl has noted that her hymen is not intact. Charge sheet material show prima facie case against the petitioner for the offences alleged against him. If the petitioner is granted bail, there are chances of he threatening the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. With this, he prayed to reject the petition. 7
6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records.
7. As per the averments of the complaint, the marriage of the complainant was fixed with the petitioner and engagement had taken place on 05.10.2021 and the marriage was fixed on 02.04.2022. It is alleged that, the petitioner subsequently met the complainant and tried to convince her and assuring that he would marry her only, had sexual intercourse with her during the month of July. It is further stated in the complaint that, there was no preparations even in the month of March and when the complainant and her mother asked the parents of the petitioner, they refused to perform the marriage of their son with the complainant. Subsequently, the petitioner also refused to marry the victim. The age of the victim girl is 19 years. She is of the age of understanding the 8 consequences of her acts. The Doctor, who examined the victim girl has noted that there are no injuries and her hymen is ruptured and there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the alleged sexual intercourse between the complainant and the petitioner is consensual. As charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. The offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.
8. The main objection of the prosecution is that if the petitioner is granted bail, he will threaten the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. The said objection can be met with by imposing stringent conditions.
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that 9 there are valid grounds for granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in Crime No.120/2022 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Hubballi, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner/accused shall not
indulge in tampering the prosecution
witnesses.
10
iii) The petitioner/accused shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE kmv