Karnataka High Court
Shri.Mahantesh S/O. Adiveppa Gadigeri vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 August, 2018
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101263 OF 2018
BETWEEN
SHRI MAHANTESH S/O.ADIVEPPA GADIGERI
AGE 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HUDALI, TAL & DIST:BELAGAVI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A.G. MULAWADMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
ANKALAGI P.S. CRIME NO.103 OF 2017 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 506 AND 376 OF IPC AND
ALSO OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT,
2012.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Ankalagi P.S. Crime No.103 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 376 of IPC besides Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. Since from the date of his arrest, the petitioner is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail among the grounds urged therein.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner- accused and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on filing of the complaint by the complainant-Smt.Parvati, a case in Crime No.103 of 2017 came to be registered before the Police for the aforesaid offences. As per the averments of the complaint, the husband of the complainant is the bus driver in KSRTC Depot, Sankeshwar and the complainant's family consisting her husband, two daughters and a son. :3: Their eldest daughter Amruta had been given in marriage with one Basavaraj of Urubinahatti Village. Their another daughter, who is victim girl was pursuing her studies in 2nd year PUC at Sardar College at Belagavi. Every day, this victim girl was making up and down to her college at Suldhal through KSRTC Bus. When she was traveling through KSRTC bus to her college, this petitioner used to misbehave with her and he also used to tease her since 3 months. This petitioner had somehow got the mobile phone number of the victim girl and he used send vulgar messages to her mobile phone. Further he used to threaten the victim girl that she should love him, otherwise, he would consume poison by leaving a suicide note in the name of her parents, through her mobile. Two months back, the victim girl had informed the above said fact to her parents, as her parents had informed the same to the petitioner's father. Despite of it, the father of the petitioner did not respond properly. As a result of this, the petitioner continued to misbehave with the victim girl, who being a college going student. The facts being stood thus, two :4: months back, when the victim girl was alone in her house at Suldhal village, this petitioner contacted her through mobile and forced her to come in the sugarcane field situated abutting to the backyard of their house and he threatened her that, if she does not come, he would send message to her elder sister Amruta and also to her husband-Basavaraj and would spoil their marital life. Further, this petitioner compelled the victim girl to come in the said sugarcane field and had sexual intercourse with her. The said fact is also informed by the victim girl to the complainant. However, the said complainant remained silent afraiding of woman dignity and their family reputation. But however, this petitioner continued his misbehavior with the victim girl and when the said victim girl was going to her college, he used to give threat to her saying she should continue to have sexual intercourse with him, otherwise, he would make viral the video of their sexual intercourse through 'whats app' of her elder sister's husband. The accused also extended life threat to the victim girl and had sexual intercourse with her for about 5 to 6 times in the back yard of her house and :5: also threatened her that, if she disclosed this fact to any body, he would spoil the marital life of her elder sister. These incidents have happened about two months back in the sugarcane filed situated at the backyard of their house. On filing of the complaint by the complainant, a case in Crime No.103 of 2017 came to be registered for the alleged offences and subsequent to registration of the Crime, the Investigating Officer took up the case for investigation and laid the charge sheet against the accused and it consisting the statement of witnesses, mahazar said to be conducted in the presence of panch witnesses, so also he secured the medical certificate relating to the victim and also the FSL report for having subjected chemical examination.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments has taken me through the complaint filed by the complainant-Smt.Parvati, who is none other than the mother of the victim girl, who is college going student. The incident took place three months prior to filing of the complaint on 02.11.2017 before the Ankalagi P.S. for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that the :6: accused had been extending life threat to the victim girl and had sexual intercourse with her in the field of sugarcane situated in the backyard of their house. The materials collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation namely FSL report, the same has been subjected to chemical examination, wherein it is opined that the presence of seminal stain was not detected in articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8; the presence of blood stains were not detected in articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8; the presence of skin tissue was not detected in article 4; and the presence of spermatozoa was not detected in article No.1. Accordingly, the certificate issued by the RFSL and the same has been finds place in the charge sheet, produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his grounds as urged in this petition. The victim girl was subjected for examination by the Doctor and as per the X-ray 7335, dated 02.11.2017, the medically estimated age of the victim girl is between 18 to 20 years, but the incident had taken place on 02.11.2017. FIR as well as charge sheet is produced by the learned counsel for the accused for the :7: purpose of perusal relating to the age of the victim girl as on 02.11.2017 and so also the FSL report relating to the medically estimated age of the victim girl as on 02.11.2017 and the medically estimated age of the victim girl is in between 18 to 20 years. But the incident was taken place three months prior to 02.11.2017 and the incident was taken place in the filed of sugarcane situated in the backyard of the house of the victim, as wherein the accused who had present in the sugarcane filed. The same has been reflected in her statement said to be recorded by the concerned Magistrate during the course of investigation as under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C. As there are no specific or direct overt act against the accused, as he had committed sexual intercourse with the victim girl, who is aged about 17 years 3 months prior to 02.11.2017 and narrated the said incident to her mother - Parvati, who had filed the complaint before the Police against the accused. It is further contended that the theory has been set up to file a complaint against the accused, as her daughter was secured by the accused in the field of sugarcane situated in :8: the backyard of her house and had sexual assault on her for 4 to 5 times prior to three months i.e., 02.11.2017.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the accused hails from respectable family and his father was a member of Zilla Panchayat during period from 2011 to 2015 and he is having better political contacts and followers in the village. To ignominy of the family members of this accused, a theory has been set up to file a complaint by the complainant, who being the mother of the victim and thereafter to register a case and proceeded with the case for investigation and laid the charge sheet against the accused. It is further submitted that the accused is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. On all these grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking the relief of bail.
6. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent
- State during the course of his arguments has taken me through the complaint dated 02.11.2017 by narrating the :9: incident said to be committed by the accused on the victim girl, who is aged about 17 years, but the sexual assault on the victim girl has taken place since three months prior to filing of the complaint before the Ankalagi P.S. In the complaint it is narrated that the accused had extended life threat to the victim and so also threatened her not to disclose this fact to any body, otherwise he would spoil the marital life of her elder sister. The same has been reflected in the FIR and so also reflected in the complaint said to be filed by the complainant, who is none other than the mother of the victim girl. The Investigating Officer after investigating the case, laid the charge sheet against the accused, it consisting of statement of the victim as well as the mahazar said to be conducted by the Investigating Officer in the presence of panch witnesses and so also the medical certificate relating to the victim. The same has been revealed in the charge sheet laid by the Investigating Officer against the accused. Therefore, it appears that there are prima facie materials against the accused and accordingly, the learned HCGP prayed to reject the bail : 10 : petition, as the petitioner does not deserve for the bail as sought for.
7. Having regard to the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned HCGP for the respondent - State, it is relevant to state that on filing of the complaint by the complainant on 02.11.2017, FIR said to be recorded by the Anakalagi P.S. in Crime No.103 of 2017 for the aforesaid offences, but the charge sheet is laid based upon the statement of the victim girl said to be recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and so also conducted mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses, the same has been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments in support of the grounds as urged in this petition. As already stated that the victim girl had been subjected to medical examination, whereas the FSL report indicates that no seminal stains have been detected and also even the blood stains have not been detected on the person of the victim girl. Further, the victim girl had been subjected for medical examination and issued : 11 : report, wherein it is opined that the medically estimated age of the victim girl is between 18 to 20 years, it is also based upon the X-ray report. However, it is necessary to state at this stage that the incident had taken place since from three months i.e., prior to 02.11.2017, the same has been taken place in the sugarcane field situated in the backyard of the house of the victim girl. In the statement of the very victim girl said to be recorded by the concerned Magistrate during the course of investigation. However, the charge sheet is laid against the accused for the aforesaid offences. However, it is necessary at this stage that the materials secured by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, it is enough materials to lay the charge sheet against the accused, but it cannot be said that there are enough materials to decline the relief of bail as sought for by the accused, merely because for allegation made against the petitioner.
8. Therefore, keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, it is said that it does not require for any detailed discussion while : 12 : considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substances in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking the relief of bail. Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and would destroy the evidence. As this apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with a like sum surety to the satisfaction of III-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in : 13 : S.C. No.64/2018 arise out of Crime No.103 of 2017 of Ankalagi P.S., is pending.
(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses.
(3) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on first week of Sunday, as per the English monthly calendar in between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. till the conclusion of the case before the concerned SHO.
(4) The petitioner shall not leave the
jurisdiction of Belagavi District without
prior permission from the concerned Court of law.
(5) The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.
If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vnp*