Karnataka High Court
Sri. Veeresh S/O Sakrappa vs State Of Karnataka on 18 July, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101445/2017
BETWEEN:
SRI. VEERESH S/O SAKRAPPA
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: AUTO DRIVER,
R/O: NEAR KAMAN,
SHRIRAMPURA COLONY,
BALLARI, DIST: BALLARI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI D M MANJUNATH, ADV.)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RURAL POLICE STATION,
BALLARI, RPTD BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL TO PETITIONER
ON ACCUSATION OF HAVING COMMITTED OFFENCES
NAMELY UNDER SECTIONS 3, 4, 5 AND 7 OF IMMORAL
TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT 1956 AND UNDER SECTION
370 OF IPC IN BALLARI RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME
NO. 132/2017.
:2:
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, and also Section 370 of IPC, registered in respondent-Police Station Crime No.132/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments that on 21.05.2017 the complainant received the information regarding the trafficking of women for the immoral purposes in the house of one Khader Basha at Haavambavi, he went along other Police Officer and staff along with panchas near the alleged place of incident and it was alleged that in front of the alleged house, the petitioner along with other accused was calling public openly for having :3: immoral gratification with alleged victims, who were beside the petitioner and other accused. It was further alleged that when a person approached the petitioner with whom other accused were standing and were involved in the immoral activities with alleged victims in the said house. Then the complainant along with his staff raided house and in consequence recovered some amount from the accused and also contraceptives in the home. When the victims, who were aged beyond 30 years, asked about their status, it was alleged that they have been forced for immoral activities by the accused persons. On the basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered against the petitioner and other accused persons for the alleged offence.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.2 and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State. :4:
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complaint averments clearly show that it is an exaggerated version of the prosecution about the alleged acts. He has also submitted it is the duty of the Police to prevent any criminal activity, but looking to the panchanama and the complaint averments, they show that the Police have waited till everything was organized and then it is their case that they have conducted raid. Hence, this is also an exaggerated version of the prosecution, which cannot be believed by the Court. He has further submitted that the question of forcing the victim girls does not arise at all as they were aged about 31-32 years. He has submitted that false allegations are made against the petitioner herein and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He has further submitted that the place at which the offence said to have been taken place, is a public place and nearby the same there is temple and school. Therefore, it cannot be imagined by the Court :5: that petitioner along with other accused was standing and inviting the public to have sexual lust with victim girls. Hence, he has submitted that petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing reasonable conditions.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP has submitted that the offences alleged are serious in nature. The complaint allegations and the mahazar clearly show the role played by each of the accused and also cash and condoms were recovered from the said place in the presence of panch witnesses and the names of the panch witnesses are also mentioned in the mahazar. He has further submitted that investigation is still going on, hence, at this stage, petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced along with the petition.
:6:
7. The alleged offence is serious in nature. It is submitted by the learned HCGP the investigation is still going on. Therefore, at this stage without making any comments on the merits of the case, petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court, if he so desires, after completion of investigation and filing of final report in the matter.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR