Karnataka High Court
Fakkirappa S/O Girimallappa Kuri, vs The State Of Karnataka, on 16 November, 2015
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101700/2015
BETWEEN:
FAKKIRAPPA
S/O GIRIMALLAPPA KURI,
AGE:23 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE AND DAIRY BUSINESS,
R/O: SANGOLLI VILLAGE,
TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI JAGADISH PATIL, ADV.)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH BAILHONGAL POLICE STATION,
R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH
AT: DHARWAD. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.VEENA HEGDE, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.439 OF
CR.P.C., SEEKING THAT PETITIONER MAY KINDLY BE
ENLARGED ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH SESSIONS
CASE NO.180/2014 (BAILHONGAL POLICE STATION CRIME
:2:
NO.127/2014) PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/SEC.366, 376(2) (i), 344, 452, 506 R/W 34
OF I.P.C. AND SEC.4 AND 7 OF PROTECTION OF
CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(i), 344, 452, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.127/2014.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments that the father of the victim lodged the complaint on 04.05.2014 alleging that during summer vacations his daughter has gone to the house of her maternal uncle Ajjappa Mallappa Narasannavar in Neginahal Village and at that time, the petitioner and :3: other accused told her that LIC amount in her name and same is matured and as her father is not well they had come to take her. Victim, then accompanied the petitioner and other accused believing their words and they kept her in confinement in their relatives house for six moths. There they ill-treated her and threatened her that they would kill her if anything is disclosed before the Police. On account of the same, complainant along with his family members started residing in Neginahaal Village. On the basis of the said complaint, case has been registered for the alleged offences.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that firstly there is delay of more than six months in lodging the complaint and on the same day of lodging the complaint i.e., on 04.05.2014, the Police :4: have recorded the statement of the victim girl, which clearly shows that she was staying in the house of the accused persons, her father use to visit the said house. Hence, this itself clearly shows that false case has been foisted against the petitioner and other accused persons and they have been falsely implicated in the case. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP has submitted that as on the date of alleged incident, the victim girl was below the age of 15 years and the complaint as well as statement of the victim girl recorded by the Investigating Officer as well as the Magistrate Court under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, clearly show that how she has been confined by the accused persons and how she has been harassed. Learned HCGP also submitted that there was a life threat to the victim girl that in case if she disclose the same, they will not spare her and it is :5: the reason for lodging the complaint after six months. Hence, submitted that prosecution placed the prima- facie material about the involvement of the petitioner and other accused person. The alleged offence under Section 376 of IPC is a serious offence and hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also perused the order passed by the Sessions Judge, at Belgum, rejecting the bail application of the petitioner.
7. Perusing the materials placed on record, admittedly and as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the alleged incident has taken place on 04.11.2013 the complaint has been lodged by the father of the victim on 04.05.2014 i.e., nearly after six months. It is no doubt true looking to the complaint and the statement of the victim, the :6: accused posed life threat that if she disclose the same, they will not spare her, and even if, same is accepted at this stage, the statement recorded on 04.05.2014 during investigation also shows that when she was staying in the house of the accused persons, her father used to visit the said house, this shows that it was within the knowledge of the complainant that his daughter was staying with accused persons. If at all, the allegations made in the complaint against the accused persons are taken to be true, then nothing prevented the complainant to lodge the complaint at the first time when he visited the said house. Therefore, at this stage, when the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed in the matter and looking to the medical report, opinion given by the doctor that there are no recent signs of sexual intercourse, hence, I am of the opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions petitioner can be considered for bail. :7:
8. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(i), 344, 452, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.127/2014, subject to following conditions:
i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR