Karnataka High Court
Narayana S/O Shivappa Lamaniand Anr vs The State Of Karntaka on 24 August, 2016
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200979/2016
Between
1. Narayana
S/o Shivappa Lamani
Age: 60 years
Occ: Agriculture
R/o Benchala Doddi Tanda
Tq. Lingasugur
2. Ramji Nayak
S/o Shivappa Lamani
Age: 50 years
Occ: Agriculture
R/o Benchala Doddi Tanda
Tq. Lingasugur
... Petitioners
(By Sri Ishwar Raj S. Chowdapur, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
(Through Hutti Police Station)
Represented by Addl.
State Public Prosecutor High Court of
Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench
...Respondent
(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to enlarge
the petitioners bail in Crime No.49/14 of Hatti Police
Station (in C.C. No.171/16 pending before JMFC
Lingasugur Dist. Raichur, which is registered for the
offences Punishable under Sections 448, 376, 511, 506
of IPC.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
This is the petition filed by the petitioners/ accused Nos. 1 and 2 under section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under sections 448, 354-B, 506 and 109 of IPC registered in Respondent police station crime number 49/2014. After completing the investigation charge-sheet was filed for the offences punishable under sections 448, 376, 511 and 506 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the Respondent/State.
3
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners made submission that even looking to the complaint averments there is no allegations so far as committing the rape on the complainant woman is concerned and accordingly the first complaint was registered for the offences punishable under sections 448, 354-B, 506 and 109 of IPC. It is also his submission that even looking to the statement of witnesses there is no prima facie materials as such to show that the petitioner No.1 has committed alleged rape on the complainant. Counsel also made submission so far as petitioner No.2 is concerned there is no such allegations in the original complaint also, but it is only the allegation that in the morning when the complainant went to accused No.2 and brought to his notice what has happened during night and accused No.2 asked to keep quite, otherwise it will affect the family prestige of her and he has also posed threat to her. Except this there is no allegation as against the petitioner No.2. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that looking to the materials placed on record there is no prima facie case at this stage against the 4 present petitioners for the alleged offence punishable under section 376 of IPC. Hence, he submitted that by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader made the submission that even though as per the original complaint the allegation is that the petitioner No.1 made an attempt to commit rape on her and when protested, he ran away. But looking to the charge-sheet material during the investigation, Investigating Officer has collected the material to show that the petitioner made an attempt to commit the offence of rape on her. Hence, the learned High Court Government Pleader made the submission that looking to the investigation materials there is prima facie case made out against the present petitioners and the offences alleged are serious one. Hence they are not entitled to be granted with bail.
5
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other charge-sheet materials. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint dated 13.3.2014 the complainant slept in her house during the night on 3.3.2014 along with her children. Her husband was gone to do the coolie work towards Bagalkot and he has not come back during night at 3.00 a.m. She has seen that somebody after pushing the door came inside the house. After seeing the said person he was one Narayan S/o Shivappa who is petitioner No.1 herein. He was holding axe in his hand. When the complainant asked him why he has come to her house, immediately the petitioner No.1 thrown the axe there only and started to remove the saree of the complainant towards upwards. Then she pushed him, but the petitioner No.1 made her to lie on the ground and he fell on her. When she told him not to commit rape on her and she screamed, at that time petitioner No.1 gagged her mouth preventing her from screaming further and he has also posed life threat to her that if she disclosed this fact to anybody else, he will 6 not spare her. Then the complainant went to the house of Narayan and knocked the door of the house of Kuppamma, the wife of petitioner No.1 Narayan came outside and told to her what has happened to her, but Kuppamma told that her husband not at all come to the house. Then the complainant came back to her house. In the morning she went to petitioner No.2 and narrated about the incident that is happened during night. Petitioner No.2 informed her not to bring it to the notice of her husband, otherwise her matrimonial life will be affected. He has also posed life threat to her from disclosing said information before anybody else. Thereafter wards her husband came to the village and informed the same before her husband and then she lodged the complaint on 13.3.2014. On the basis of said complaint firstly the case was registered for the offences punishable under sections 448, 354-B, 506 and 109 of IPC and after conducting the investigation charge-sheet was failed for the offences punishable under sections 448, 376 R/w section 511 and section 506 of IPC. 7
6. Looking to the materials placed on record, the allegations as against petitioner No.1 that he entered into the house of complainant during night and made an attempt to commit rape on her. So far as petitioner No.2 is concerned there are no serious allegations as such. Now the investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed by the Investigating Officer. Petitioners contended in the bail petition that they are innocent, not committed alleged offences and they are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed. The alleged offence under section 376 R/w section 511 of IPC is also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. By imposing stringent conditions the petitioners can be admitted to bail.
Accordingly the petition is allowed. Petitioners/ accused Nos. 1 and 2 are ordered to be released on bail of the alleged offences subject to the following conditions;
(1) Each petitioner has to execute personal bond for Rs.1.00 lakh with one solvent surety for the 8 like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(2) They shall not tamper any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
(3) They shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE *MK