Karnataka High Court
Reshma Parveen @ Rihana Parveen vs State By on 24 November, 2021
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8100/2021
BETWEEN
1 . RESHMA PARVEEN @ RIHANA PARVEEN
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
W/O K ALIJAN
TAILORING AND BROKERING WORK
VASTHRE STREET
HASSAN - 577 201
2 . MUSTHAFA @ MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA
S/O LATE D R ABBAS
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/O BAKARAVALLI (V) AND (P)
BELUR TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573115
3 . SRI SIRAJ @ SIRAJUDDIN
S/O LATE ABUBEKAR
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O UPPALLI INDAVARA POST
CHIKMAGALURU TALUK-577101
4 . RUKSANA BANU
W/O KHALEEL AHAMED
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
MARRIAGE BROKER
ARAVIND NAGAR
CHIKMAGALURU-577101
2
5 . KHALANDAR
S/O MUSTHUFA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
AUTO DRIVER
R/O BEHIND DONIGAL OLD BUS STAND
SAKLESHPUR POST
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 134
6 . ADAM ABDULLA @ ADAM
S/O ABDULLA K P
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/O BAKARAVALLI
AREHALLI HOBLI
BELUR TALUK
HASSAN DIST-573115
7 . MOHAMMED FAYAZ
S/O MUSTHUFA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O NEAR KUSHALNAGAR MILL
SAKLESHPUR POST
HASSAN DISTRICT-573134
8 . SMT MANJULA @ ANU
W/O LATE SHIVAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O MAGADI VILLAGE
MUGULAVALLI POST
CHIKMAGALURU TALUK-577101
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAVKUMAR N.R., ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE BY
CHIKMAGALUR TOWN POLICE STATION
CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PORSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-01.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI KRISHNA KUMAR K.K., HCGP)
3
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.147/2021 OF
CHIKKAMAGALURU TOWN POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 419,
394, 389, 384 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1, 3 to 8 and 12 filed under Sections 439 Cr.P.C in Crime No.147/2021 registered by Chikkamagaluru Town Police Station, Chikkamagaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 419, 394, 389, 384 read with 149 of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint was registered on 10.08.2021 by Kumar N.R. who was running cloth shop in the name of 4 Snowlite at Chikkamagalur and some days prior to the incident the accused No.1-Reshma came to his shop for business. Subsequently she used to call him through phone and talk to him. Thereafter on 31.07.2021 accused No.1-Reshma contacted the complainant over the mobile phone and asked him to pay Rs.10,000/- which was required to the accused No.4 for medical expenditure. Though, he had stated to the accused No.1-Reshma that he does not have any money, inspite of the same again on 1.8.2021 the said accused No.1-Reshma called him to handover the money to accused No.2-Sajida at the earliest. Therefore, on 2.8.2021 at the instance of accused No.1, the complainant went to the house of accused No.2-Sajida for paying Rs.10,000/- and he went inside the house of accused No.2 on 2.8.2021 at 2.30 p.m. along with his friend Kumar at that time accused No.2 was present in the house and he informed about the 5 telephone call of the accused No.1. While they were sitting inside, they noticed two female in the house. Thereafter, suddenly some four persons came inside the house and slapped the complainant and his friend and stated that they are police and questioned why they came to the house as the place was said to be a brothel centre. After assaulting both of them, they snatched Rs.50,000/- from the pocket of the complainant and Rs.25,000/- from the pocket of complainant's friend Kumar. Thereafter both of them were sent inside a room by making them nude and other two females were also present in the said room. After which accused Nos.3 and 10 took nude video graph of the complainant and his friend along with the other two females. Subsequently, they demanded them to give Rs.20 lakhs from the complainant otherwise they threatened to release the porn video to the website. The complainant is said to have agreed 6 to pay Rs.2 lacks to them, thereafter they were made to wear the clothes. The accused is said to have noticed ATM card of the complainant's friend Kumar and they took them to ATM and drew Rs.25,000/- from his account and the remaining amount of Rs.1 laksh was allowed to be paid on or before 10.08.2021. Thereafter, the complainant is stated to have intimated the same to the accused No.1 and at that time the accused No.1 stated to have told the complainant that while giving money he should inform her. After hearing to this he suspected that accused No.1 is designing the entire episode. Therefore, he lodged the complaint and police arrested these petitioners, remanded on judicial custody on 13.8.2021. Their bail petition came to be rejected by Sessions Judge and hence petitioners are before this Court.
7
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended they are innocent in the alleged offences and most of the accused being women are entitled for specific consideration. The allegation about withdrawal of amount of Rs.25,000/- from the CW2 is not the Bank situated at M.G. Road, Chikkamagarlu but the Bank is at Jyothi nagar which is 3 to 4 kms away from the M.G. Road. Therefore the contention of the complainant cannot be accepted that Rs.25,000/- was withdrawn by the accused persons. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. The petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP submitted that the offence committed by the accused persons are heinous and the charge sheet also filed for the offence 8 of 395 of IPC and other offences. The petitioner pre planned under the guise of the police and trapped the complainant and snatched cash and also demanded ransom from the complainant. Accused Nos.3 and 10 are also stated to have taken the nude video graph and laid accused Nos.11 and 12 along with the complainant and his friend and used for threatening the complainant for extracting money and if they are granted bail, they may commit similar offences and destroy the evidence of heinous crime. Hence, prayed for rejecting the bail petition.
6. Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of the records, as already stated above, the accused No.1-Reshma Parvin with other accused persons trapped the complainant and his friend asking them to come to house of accused No.2 under the guise of seeking for Rs.10,000/- loan amount for medical expenses. Subsequently, accused Nos.3 to 10 9 entered the house and they stated they are police and the place is a brothel place. Subsequently, accused were made to remove cloth and made them nude and were made to lie with the accused Nos.11 and 12 female and they took the Accused Nos.3 and 10 took the nude video graph of the complainant and his friend Kumar. Thereafter they demanded for Rs.20, lakhs and the complainant agreed to pay Rs.2 lakh and 1 lack they received through snatching from the pocket of complainants and his friend and Rs.25,000/- through the ATM of CW2. Thereafter they had given time till 10.8.2021 for giving another Rs.1 lakh otherwise they threatened to viral the video in the public website. Subsequently, the accused persons also called the complainant through mobile phone and demanded for the remaining money. At the time when the complainant informed the said episode to accused No.1, as he was contacted by accused No.1 10 earlier to pay Rs.10,000/- to accused No.2 at that time accused No.1 said to have stated that while giving the remaining money he should intimate her. Thereafter he suspected and came to know that accused No.1 is involved in the entire episode therefore complaint came to be lodged.
7. On the basis of the records and charge sheet which reveals that all the accused persons have actively participated in the commission of the offence in getting the nude video graph of the complainant and his friend and committing the robbery and also threatening for the amount and taking nude video graph of the complainant and his friend. Though learned counsel submits that the amount was withdrawn at Jyothi Nagar Branch ATM which is 3 to 4 kms away from MG. Road Chikkamagalur, that cannot a ground for granting bail to the accused persons. Hence they are all arrested and cash more than 11 Rs.9,350/- has been recovered apart from the mobile phone and call records.
If the petitioners are granted bail they might commit similar offence and tamper with the prosecution witnesses are not ruled out. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled for granting bail.
Accordingly, criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV