Karnataka High Court
Naveen Kumar vs State By on 6 December, 2021
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8412 OF 2021
BETWEEN
NAVEEN KUMAR
SON OF RAJU
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/A NO. 156, 5TH CROSS
AMBEDKAR NAGAR
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
BANGALORE-560016. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI K.R. NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI BASAVARAJA BARIKARA, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE BY
BANASWADI POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY SPL.P.P.
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE 560001. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.420/2021
REGISTERED BY BANASWADI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376, 323,
354, 354(C), 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting regular bail in Crime No.420/2021 registered by Banaswadi Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 354, 354C, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the victim who is aged about 41 years filed a complaint on 03.09.2021 alleging that she was working at Lewis Infrastructure and Project Limited, she married in the year 2007 and she is having 13 years old daughter. She came in contact with this petitioner through one Joe Fernandez and thereafter, the petitioner is said to be proposed the complainant to marry him. However, without marrying, both of them continued their live in relationship till 2018. 3 Thereafter, the complainant came to know that the petitioner was already married and had three grownup children and had several criminal records in different Police stations. Immediately, the complainant confronted the same to the petitioner and the same was denied by him. Thereafter, there was a quarrel between them for the said reason. The petitioner sent his henchmen to follow her and threaten her. Subsequently, on 01.08.2021, he came to the complainant's house in the mid night, forced to open the door and after opening of the door, he came inside the house and dragged her inside the kitchen and misbehaved with her and due to rising alarm by her daughter by calling for help, then the accused said to be left the place. Hence, she filed a complaint. During the investigation, she has given her further statement on 04.09.2021 alleging that the accused used to come inside the house and had forcibly sexual assault on her. The first incident was held in the month of April 2021. Again, the accused came inside the house and misbehaved with her. On 01.09.2021, in the night, when she was sleeping with her daughter in 4 the bed room, the petitioner came inside the house, dragged the complainant to the kitchen and committed forcible rape on her. But she has not stated the same in her complaint. After registering the case, the petitioner was arrested on 04.09.2021 and remanded to the judicial custody. His bail petition came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. Hence, he is before this Court.
4. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the records which reveals that the petitioner is aged about 44 years having wife and grownup children and the complainant is aged about 41 years, she is married woman and having a child. Both of them were having live in relationship and due to some quarrel between them, the complaint came to be lodged. While giving complaint, the complainant has not stated anything about forcible rape on her. Subsequently, in the further statement after registering the case, she has mentioned that the accused has committed rape on her against her will. Though the learned counsel submits that the alleged offence is said to 5 be committed on 01.08.2021 and subsequently, on 03.09.2021, there is an inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. Petitioner is aged person and the complainant is also aged and married woman. Since, both are having live in relationship, it cannot be said that there is a sexual assault on the complainant. By looking to the age of the victim and the accused as they both were having live in relationship and the Police have already filed the charge- sheet against the petitioner, such being the case, by imposing certain conditions, if bail is granted, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, the following ORDER Accordingly, criminal petition is allowed. The Jurisdictional Court is directed to release the petitioner-accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.420/2021 registered by Banasawadi Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 354, 354C, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
6
(i) Petitioner-accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Committal Court;
(ii) Petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;
(iii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;
(iv) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the trial Court.
(v) Petitioner shall take the trial without causing any delay.
Sd/-
JUDGE GBB