Shri. Yogesh S/O Ranoba Gurav vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 5920 Kant

                             1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF APRIL, 2022

                          BEFORE

             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI

              CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100050/2022
BETWEEN:

SHRI. YOGESH S/O RANOBA GURAV
AGE:38 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. PLOT NO. 17, H.NO. 390
TILAKAWADI, SUBHASH NAGAR
BELGAVI, DIST. BELGAVI-590006.
                                                 ...APPELLANT
(BY SHRI S.M.MUCHANDI., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       THE POLICE INSPECTOR RURAL
       POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI
       DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN: 590006
       REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC
       PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING
       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD
       AT. DHARWAD BENCH, PIN. 580011.

2.     SMT. RENUKA W/O. RAVI SHIGIHALLI
       AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
       H.NO. 852, AMBEDKAR GALLI
       HUNCHYANATTI, TQ & DIST: BELGAVI
       PIN. 590014.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS.
(BY SMT. GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP, FOR R.1;
NOTICE TO R1-SERVED)

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.14 A(2) OF
SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE (PA) ACT, SEEKING
TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.01.2022 PASSED IN
CRI.MISC.NO.1335/2021 BY III   ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS COURT, BELAGAVI, AND ENLARGED APPELLANT ON
REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.CASE NO.268/2021 (BELAGAVI RURAL P.S.
CRIME 125/2021) UNDER SECTIONS 366, 376(2) (N), 342, 506 OF
                                   2




INDIAN PENAL CODE AND SECTION 3(1), 3(1)(S) (Va) OF SC/ST
(PA) ACT.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

                               JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed under section 14-A(2) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 ('SC-ST Act' for short), challenging the

order dated 10.01.2022 passed in Criminal Misc.

No.1335/2021 by the learned III Addl. District and Sessions

Judge, Belagavi.

2. It is contended by the appellant that the Belagavi

Rural police have registered a case under Crime No.125/2021

for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2) (n),

342, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3(2)

(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 against the appellant on

12.09.2021. The appellant was arrested on 14.09.2021. It is

alleged that one Smt. Renuka W/o Ravi Shigihalli, aged 30

years, resident of Hunchyanati, filed a complaint alleging that

she is residing with her husband and two children. The

appellant friend of complainant's husband used to visit their

house and he used to tell the complainant that appellant

loves her and he insisted her to marry him. He also gave one

Nokia mobile phone with SIM card. It is further alleged that

on 08.08.2021, appellant took victim in a car by force and

purchased new cloths to her. In spite of her refusal, the

appellant took victim to one village and wrongfully confined

her in a house. Then on next day, he took her to Kolhapur

and committed rape on her against her will. Appellant also

took her to Chiplun and stayed in a lodge. Then again they

came to Kolhapur and stayed in a lodge. Complainant came

to know that the police are searching for her. She voluntarily

went to the house of her friend by name Madhuri and

informed to the police about the incident. It is further

contended that knowing fully well that she belongs to

scheduled caste community, the appellant kidnapped,

threatened and committed rape on her. After completion of

investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet for the

offences stated above.

3. Heard Shri S.M.Muchhandi, the learned counsel

for the appellant and Smt. Girija Hiremath, learned High

Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that

that appellant is innocent and a case has been filed against

appellant with the ulterior motive. The complaint came to be

lodged after 33 days of the alleged incident. Earlier the

complainant's mother i.e., Mangala Pawar lodged a missing

complaint stating that her daughter is missing since

09.08.2021. Then the complainant appeared before the

Belagavi Rural police on 14.08.2021 stating that she had

gone to Jyotiba temple and that missing case was closed. It is

stated that if any incident like rape wrongful confinement had

taken place then she would have told the police on that day

itself. After one month against this complaint came to be

registered on different allegation. Learned counsel further

argued that the contention of the appellant in her complaint

are imaginary and cannot be believed. As according to victim,

she was taken to Bazar, hotels, lodge, where all the publics

have excess and lot of people will be present. Complainant

also admitted that she had taken Nokia mobile phone along

with SIM from this appellant. If he has forcibly taken her to a

Bazar, hotels., etc, she could have escaped from the

appellant or called for help and raised hue and cry if she has

not accompanied voluntarily. The medical evidence does not

show sexual intercourse on the victim. This goes to show that

at the most even if allegations are considered as true it is

shows that the appellant and complainant had consensual

sexual relationship. Learned counsel further argued that

there are inconsistencies and contradictions in her statement

under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and in her statement before the

police. The appellant is no more required for investigation. He

is having children and wife. Hence, he prays to enlarge the

appellant on bail.

5. Against this learned High Court Government

Pleader argued that the alleged offence is heinous one. The

very nature of relationship with the woman belonging to

down trodden community itself shows that, the appellant is

misusing the woman belonging to a down trodden caste. The

police have completed the investigation and there is material

to show that he has committed the offence as alleged. He

may threaten the victim or may abscond if he is released on

bail. Therefore, looking into the nature of offence and the

material placed before the Court, the appellant is not entitled

to be enlarged on bail. Hence, learned HCGP prays to reject

the petition.

6. I have perused the material, records and also

statements placed before me.

7. Admittedly, the appellant and complainant are

already married persons. They are having children. The

statement at the earliest itself discloses that she was taking

cloths, mobile phone and other material from this appellant,

though according to her, they were given by force. It is

evident that they were acquainted with each other for quite

long time. Learned counsel for the appellant produced two

photographs with memo showing the birthday celebration of

appellant by complainant-victim to show how close their

relationship is. It is also evident that according to the victim-

complainant she was taken to market, public places, hotels

where the publics are available, victim had all the opportunity

to escape or call for help if she was taken against her will or

forcibly. When missing complaint was lodged by her mother

she came to police station and stated that she had been to

Jyotiba temple, at that time also she did not disclose about

any sexual assault on her. Of course, it is stated that out of

fear she did not disclose the real incident and subsequently,

she reveled about the incident to her husband. Hence, the

complaint came to be lodged. These are the materials to be

considered at the time of trial. Of course, looking in the

nature of allegation, material placed before the Court,

statements of victim-complainant and her mother, earlier FIR

and as the investigation is already completed, in my

considered view the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on

bail.

8. It is settled principle of law that bail is a rule and

rejection is an exception. While granting or rejecting the bail

application, the Court will have to take into consideration,

(1) the nature and seriousness of the offence;

(2) character of the accused;

        (3)   circumstances    which    are    peculiar   to
              accused;

(4) reasonable probabilities of presence of the accused not being secured at trial;

(5) reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with; and

(6) larger interest of public or the state and similar other considerations, which arise when a court is asked to admit the accused to bail in a non-bailable offence.

9. So in the light of above principles, if the facts and

circumstance of the present case are considered it is evident

that victim is not a minor. On the other hand she is having

two children. The appellant is ready to abide by conditions.

The material placed before the Court and the facts and

circumstances of the case discloses that the appellant is no

more required for investigation or interrogation. However,

the apprehension of the prosecution is that the appellant may

abscond or may tamper the prosecution witnesses and may

not be available for trial, can be meted out by imposing

reasonable conditions on him. Accordingly, I proceed to pass

the following:

ORDER

1. The criminal appeal filed under section 14-A(2) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 is allowed.

2. The appellant/accused by name Yogesh S/o

Ranoba Gurav, R/o Plot No.17, H.No.390, Tilakawadi,

Subhash Nagar, Belagavi in Crime No.125/2021 of Belagavi

Rural Police Station, pending on the file of III Addl. District

and Sessions Judge., Belagavi, registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(n), 342, 506 of Indian

Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3(2) (v) of Scheduled

Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Amendment Act, 2015, shall be released on bail, subject to

the following conditions.

i) The appellant/accused shall execute a self bond for Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court or committal Court where the case is now pending.

ii) The appellant shall not try to tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

iii) The appellant shall furnish authenticated documents in proof of his residential and correct address and shall inform the Court/Police if there is any change in the address and furnish his mobile phone number/numbers to Court and I.O.

iv) The appellant shall not involve in any criminal activities and shall not commit similar offences.

v) The appellant shall appear before the Court on all dates of hearing without fail unless his presence is dispensed.

vi) The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Belagavi District without permission of the trial Court.

In case if any of the condition is violated, the

prosecution is at liberty to move application for cancellation

of bail.

SD/-

JUDGE

am/-