Santhosh Gurav vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 February, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Santhosh Gurav vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 February, 2020

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                            -1-




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020

                        BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA


         CRIMINAL PETITION NO.680 OF 2020

BETWEEN:

SANTHOSH GURAV
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
S/O SHIVANAND
R/O HARUGERI VILLAGE
BELGAUM DISTRICT - 591220
                                            ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRABHUGOUD B. TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION
MADIKERI
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.
                                        ...RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. K. P. YASHODA, HCGP )


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.5/2019 OF KODAGU CEN
CRIME P.S., KODAGU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 67(a) OF THE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2008 AND SECTION 509 OF
IPC.
                            -2-



    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                       ORDER

This petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.5/2019.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP. Learned HCGP has not filed any statement of objections, but has orally opposed the petition.

3. The allegations against the petitioner is that he developed friendship with the complainant through mobile phone and facebook. About three months earlier to lodging of complaint, he called the complainant to Hassan and took her to a park and took obscene photographs and snatched her mobile. According to the complainant, by making use of her mobile phone, the accused created a fake facebook account and circulated those obscene photographs of the complainant. -3-

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. The allegations made in the complaint do not attract the ingredients of the offence. Petitioner is ready to participate in the investigation and thus seeks for an appropriate order under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

5. The allegations made in the complaint, in my view, require custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Alleged mobile phone containing sexually explicit content is required to be recovered. Hence, it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The contention of the petitioner that there is a delay in lodging the complaint, cannot be a factor to admit the petitioner to bail, especially when the circumstance narrated in the complaint indicate that only when the petitioner resorted to circulate the photographs of the complainant, she was driven to lodge the complaint. Under the above circumstances, delay in lodging the -4- complaint, in my view, does not in any way weaken the allegations made in the complaint. The allegations require thorough investigation for which purpose, custody of the petitioner is necessary. Hence, the criminal petition is dismissed.

SD/-

JUDGE RD

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court