Karnataka High Court
Arun S/O Krishnappa ... vs State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19 T H DAY OF JULY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100147/2021
BETWEEN:
ARUN S/O. KRISHNAPPA DIBBANNA NAVAR,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: A GRICULTURE,
R/O. BYATHANAL, TQ. HANGAL,
DIST. HAVERI.
...A PPELLANT
(BY SRI. ARAVIND D. KULKARNI , AD VOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH AD UR POLICE STATION ,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD.
2. SMT. ROOPA W/O. SATISHKUMAR
YARBANDI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. BYATHANAL, TQ. HANGAL,
DIST. HAVERI.
... RES PONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI , HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 14A( 2) OF SC/ST ( POA) ACT, SEEKING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.06.2021 PASSED BY
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I, A T
2
HAVERI IN S PL. S .C. AND ST NO.12/2021
CONSEQUENTLY , ALLOW THE PRES ENT APPEA L AND
ENLARGE T HE A PPELLANT ON BAIL I N SPL. SC AND ST
NO.12/ 2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADD L.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, F TSC-1, AT HAV ERI
REGISTERED F OR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UND ER
SECTION 363, 376(2), 506, 34 OF I PC AND S ECTION 4
AND 6 OF PROTECTION OF CHI LD REN FROM SEXUA L
OFFENCES A CT, 2012 AND SECTION 3(1)( w)( i)( ii) ,
3(2)( va) , 3(2)( v) OF THE SC AND ST (POA)
AMENDMENT ACT, 2015.
THIS CRIMINAL A PPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, T HE COURT MADE THE F OLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the accused No.1
challenging the order dated 24.06.2021 passed
in Special S.C./S.T.No.12/2021 by the
Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I,
At Haveri, whereunder, the bail application
filed by the appellant/accused No.1 in Crime
No.25/2021 of Adur Police Station, for the
offences punishable under Sections 363,
376(2), 506 read with Section 34 of The Indian
Penal Code (for brevity, hereinafter referred to
as 'IPC') and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of
Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for
brevity hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO
Act',) and Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va),
3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,
(hereinafter referred to as the 'SC/ST (POA)
Act', for brevity) has been rejected.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that,
one Roopa W/o. Satishkumar Yarbandi has filed
complaint on 19.02.2021, stating that, her
father has totally seven children and last one is
the victim-girl, aged 17 years 1 month,
studying in the I PUC in Shri. Shanteshwar
College, Tiluvalli village. It is further stated
that, when the victim-girl was sitting in the
house sadly and on enquiry by the
complainant, the victim-girl has stated that
accused No.1 belonging to the same village
came in contact with her and used to talk with
her over phone and he started insisting to love
him, otherwise, he will not spare anybody in
her family. It is further stated that, on
23.01.2021 at about 11.00 a.m., near
Shanteshwara College, Tilavalli village, accused
Nos.1 and 2 took the victim-girl in TATA ACE
vehicle to Chikkeri village, thereby they
purchased Tali and on the way in a Temple,
accused No.1 forcibly tied Tali to the victim-
girl and told her that, she is his wife and she
has to listen to his words. Thereafter, accused
Nos.1 and 2 threatened her not to discuss the
said aspect to her family members and left her
in Tiluvalli village. It is further stated that, on
01.02.2021 at about 1.00 p.m., when the
victim-girl was coming from her collage,
accused Nos.1 and 3 took her stating that they
will drop her to her grand-mother's house and
accused No.1 took her to a paddy field and told
her that, he is her husband and had sexual
intercourse and thereafter threatened her not
to disclose this aspect to anybody and left her
near Timmapur village. The said complaint
came to be registered in Crime No.25/2021 of
Adur Police Station for the aforesaid offence.
The appellant/accused No.1 came to be
arrested on 20.02.2021. Thereafter, the
charge-sheet has been filed. The appellant has
filed bail application in Special SC/ST
No.12/2021 and the same came to be rejected
by the Additional District and Sessions Judge,
FTSC-I, at Haveri. The appellant/accused No.1
has challenged the said order in the present
appeal.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant and the
learned High Court Government Pleader for the
respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 in spite of
service of notice, remained un-represented.
4. Learned counsel for the
appellant/accused No.1 would contend that, as
per the averments of the complaint, the
incidents took place on 23.01.2021 and
01.02.2021 and the complaint came to be filed
on 19.02.2021 and there is a delay in filing the
complaint. He further contends that, on perusal
of the statement of the victim-girl recorded
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the victim-girl
was in love affair with the appellant/accused
No.1. The Doctor who examined the victim-girl
has noted that, she has no external injuries,
which rules out the forcible sexual intercourse.
He contends that, the accused No.2 has been
granted bail and accused No.3 has been
granted anticipatory bail and therefore, the
appellant/accused No.1 is entitled for bail. He
contends that, without looking into all these
aspects, the Special Court has rejected the bail
application of the appellant/accused No.1,
which requires interference by this Court. With
this, he prayed to allow the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned High Court
Government Pleader contended that the offence
alleged against the appellant/accused No.1 is a
heinous offence, punishable with imprisonment
for life. The victim-girl is aged 17 years 1
month as on the date of the offence. The
statement of victim-girl recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C., reveals the overt acts of the
appellant/accused No.1. The Doctor who
examined the victim-girl has noted that the
hymen is torn. He contends that, on looking to
the entire charge-sheet material, there is a
prima-facie case against the appellant/accused
No.1 for the offences alleged against him.
Considering all these aspects, the Special
Court has rightly rejected the bail application
of the appellant/accused No.1, which does not
call for any interference by this Court. With
this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having regard to the arguments of
the learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned High Court Government Pleader, this
Court has gone through the charge sheet
material and the impugned order.
7. The victim-girl is aged about 17 years
1 month as on the date of offence and she was
studying in the I PUC. The alleged incidents
took place on 23.01.2021 and 01.02.2021 and
the complaint came to be filed on 19.02.2021
and there is a delay in filing the complaint.
Even though, forcible tying of Tali by the
appellant/accused No.1 on 23.01.2021 and
forcible sexual intercourse on 01.02.2021, the
victim-girl has not disclosed the same to any
person, till filing of the complaint. On perusal
of the statement of the victim-girl recorded
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, it is clear that,
the victim-girl is having love affair with the
appellant/accused No.1. The Doctor who
examined the victim-girl has noted that there
are no external injuries over the body and the
genitalia of the victim-girl. The victim-girl is of
the age of understanding the consequences of
her acts. The charge-sheet has been filed and
therefore, the appellant/accused No.1 is not
required for any custodial interrogation. There
are no criminal antecedents of the
appellant/accused No.1. Without considering all
these aspects, the Special Court has passed
the impugned order which calls for interference
by this Court. The main objection of the
prosecution is that, in the event of grant of
bail the appellant is likely to threaten the
complainant and other prosecution witness.
The said objection may be met with by
imposing stringent conditions.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the
case and submission of the counsel, this Court
is of the view that there are valid grounds for
granting bail subject to certain terms and
conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order
is set aside. The bail application filed by the
appellant/accused No.1 before the Special
Court, stands allowed. Consequently, the
appellant/accused No.1 is ordered to be
released on bail in Crime No.25/2021 of Adur
Police Station (pending on the file of the
Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I,
at Haveri, in Special S.C. & S.T. No.12/2021)
subject to the following conditions:
i) The appellant/accused No.1 shall
execute a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only)
with one surety for the like sum to
the satisfaction of the jurisdictional
Court.
ii) The appellant/accused No.1 shall not
indulge in tampering the prosecution
witnesses.
iii) The appellant/accused No.1 shall
attend the Court on all the dates of
hearing unless exempted and co-
operate in speedy disposal of the
case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
*Svh/-
