Karnataka High Court
Imran Khan @ Imran @ Saddam S/O Abdul ... vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 12 December, 2022
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.200216/2022
BETWEEN
IMRAN KHAN @ IMRAN @ SADDAM
S/O ABDUL HAMEED @ HAMEED FAUJI
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
GRAM PANCHAYAT MEMBER MIRIYAN,
R/O: MIRIYAN, VILLAGE.
TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST KALABURAGI. ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ASHOK MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH POLICE MIRIYAN POLICE STATION,
DIST:KALABURAGI,
REPT.BY ADDL. SPP. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH - 585 107.
2. BASALINGAMMA D/O ABHIMANYU VADDAR,
AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: MIRIYAN VILLAGE, TQ: CHINCHOLI,
DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 307. ..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP, FOR R1
BY SRI. ANANTH S. JAHAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL FILED U/SEC. 14-A OF SC/ST
(PA) ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE II-ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN CRL.MISC.NO.2220/2022 DATED
08.11.2022 AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN CRIME
NO.21/2022 OF MIRIYAN POLICE STATION TQ: CHINCHOLI,
DIST: KALABURAGI, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SECS.
493, 495, 448, 506, 376(2)(n) IPC AND 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v),
3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST PA ACT.
2
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST (POA) Act' for short) to enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.21/2022 registered at Miryan Police Station, Kalaburagi, for offences punishable under Sections 493, 495, 506, 448 and 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/victim.
3. In the complaint lodged with the police by the victim on 23.10.2022, she has alleged that she got acquainted with the appellant and about three months prior he gave her a Airtel SIM and thereafter used to call 3 her on her mobile and both of them used to talk with each other. On 12.09.2022 at about 1:00 p.m. when she was in the house the accused trespassed into the house and committed forcible sexual intercourse against her will. Again on 13.09.2022 when she had gone to Chincholi, appellant met her and telling her that he will marry her, took her in a car bearing Reg.No.KA-32-Z-4449 to a hotel in Tandur and committed sexual intercourse against her will and then tied a Thali to her neck and repeatedly committed sexual intercourse on her. She has further alleged that after eight days once again the accused called her and took her to Durga hotel in Tandur, wherein she stayed with him for about six days and during her stay he committed sexual intercourse. Further, he took a house on rent in Tandur and even there committed sexual intercourse. Thereafter, she returned to her house on 22.10.2022 in the evening and informed the entire incident to her parents.
4
4. The learned counsel for appellant would contend that the entire allegations are false and the allegations are politically motivated. He contends that the victim is aged about 21 years and the narration of events in the complaint clearly shows that she is a consenting party and therefore even if allegations are taken at its face value the ingredients of the alleged offence are not made out. He submits that the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions, hence, seeks to allow the appeal.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader contends that the victim has categorically stated about the heinous act committed by the appellant and therefore there is a prima facie case made out against him. He contends that in view of the nature of allegations and the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged, appellant is not entitled for the relief of bail. He submits that appellant may threaten the victim, in case he is enlarged on bail. Hence, he has sought to dismiss the appeal. 5
6. The victim is present before the Court. She is represented by a learned counsel. He submits that, as per instructions given by the victim, she was pressurized to lodge a complaint against the appellant and she has no objection for the release of the appellant.
7. The submission made on behalf of the victim is not a ground to enlarge the appellant on bail. However, perusal of her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. shows that she has not made any allegations against the appellant, on the other hand, she has stated that she has not lodged any complaint and no incident has taken place and she is not interested to give any statement etc. Admittedly, the victim is a major aged about 21 years. Her statement is already recorded. The appellant was arrested on 24.10.2022, he has been interrogated and not required for any further interrogation. Taking into consideration the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., without expressing any view 6 on the merits of the case, appellant can be admitted to bail.
8. Accordingly, following:
ORDER Appeal is allowed.
The order dated 08.11.2022 passed in Cri.Misc.No.2220/2022 by the II-Additional Dist. &
Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, is hereby set-aside.
Appellant-accused shall be released on bail in Crime No.21/2022 of Miryan Police Station, subject to following conditions:
i. Appellant shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;
ii. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence/witnesses either directly or indirectly;7
iii. He shall not put any threat or
inducement to the victim, in any
manner;
iv. He shall furnish proof of his address and
shall inform the Investigating
Officer/Court, if there is any change in the address;
v. He shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail.
Sd/-
JUDGE sdu