Karnataka High Court
Manjunath Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 June, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.554 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
MANJUNATH PRASAD
S/O KEMANNA PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT NO.96/5, 3rd CROSS,
5th MAIN ROAD, MATHIKERE,
YESHWANTHPURA,
BENGALURU - 560 054.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. JAYAPRAKASH H., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY YESHWANTHPURA POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU.
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTION ,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SMT. M. DEVI
W/O SHIVARAJ M.,
R/AT NO.11, 14th MAIN ROAD,
HMT LAYOUT, MATHIKERE,
BENGALURU - 560 054.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KRISHNA KUMAR K.K, HCGP FOR R.1;
R2 IS SERVED)
2
THIS CRLIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO GRANT THE ANTICIPATORY
BAIL TO THE APPELLANT U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. R/W 14(A) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT IN CR.NO.414/2021 FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES P/U/S 354(A), 506, 509, 34, 376, 342, 354 OF IPC
AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, IN THE EVENT
OF HIS ARREST BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE, HE MAY BE
ENLARGED ON BAIL, NOW THE FILE IS PENDING ON THE FILE
OF CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-71),
BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING;
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by accused No.1 in Crime
No.414/2021 registered at Yeshwanthapura Police
Station, Bengaluru City for offences punishable under
Sections 3(2)(V) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 and under Sections 354(A), 506, 509, 376,
342, 354 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. The appellant filed a petition before the
Sessions Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking
anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the learned
Sessions Judge by order dated 03.03.2022 in Crl. Misc.
No.1184/2022.
3. Heard the learned counsel for appellant and
learned HCGP for respondent No.1 - State and perused
the material on record.
4. Respondent No.2/ defacto complainant has
been served, but there is no representation.
5. It is averred in the complaint lodged by
respondent No.2 that she belongs to Scheduled Caste.
The appellant is running a Karate Training Institute,
wherein she is working as assistant, incharge of the
equipments. It is alleged that on 28.03.2021 at about
7.30-8.00 a.m., when the parents and sisters of the
accused were not present, the accused by tying her
hands with dupatta, committed sexual assault on her
inspite of her resistance and committed forcible sexual
intercourse on her. It is further alleged that when the
parents of the accused and his sisters suddenly came, he
removed the dupatta which was tied. His parents and
others reprimanded him. His father threatened her not
to disclose the incident to others. It is further alleged
that later the accused started ill-treating the complainant
as well as her sister and threatened that if they do not
cooperate, he will create a fake facebook account in their
names and project them as prostitutes. Then he opened
a fake facebook account and the complainant, her
husband and her sister started receiving several
anonymous phone calls and unable to bear the same, her
sister attempted to commit suicide etc.
6. The learned counsel for appellant has
contended that the entire allegations are false and the
appellant is innocent. He contends that there is an
inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. He submits
that the appellant has assisted the complainant
financially by giving her hand-loan on different dates
during lockdown period and the present complaint is
lodged only to avoid the said payment. He further
contends that the complainant is pressurizing and
demanding huge amount from the appellant to withdraw
the case. It is his further contention that no such
incident as alleged by the complainant has taken place.
He submits that the appellant will cooperate with
investigation and abide by any conditions. He submits
that the trial Court without properly appreciating the
entire facts and circumstances of the case has
erroneously rejected the prayer seeking anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, he seeks to allow the appeal.
7. Learned High Court Government Pleader has
contended that there is a prima facie case against the
appellant for having committed a heinous offence. He
contends that the trial Court taking into consideration
serious nature of the offence, has rightly rejected the
prayer seeking anticipatory bail. He further contends that
in the event of grant of any relief to the appellant there
are chances of influencing or threatening the
complainant and other prosecution witnesses. He
therefore seeks to reject the appeal.
8. Perusal of the complaint would clearly reveal
that the complainant while working as an assistant in the
Karate Institute run by the appellant was subjected to
sexual assault. The allegations in the complaint cannot
be doubted only on the ground that there is delay in
lodging the complaint. It is stated by the complainant
that the accused has committed rape against her will and
he has threatened her as well as her sister. He opened a
fake facebook account, which has led to complainant and
her sister receiving calls from different persons, due to
which her sister attempted to commit suicide etc. The
contention of the learned counsel for appellant that in
view of some financial transaction, a false complaint has
been lodged, cannot be accepted at this stage. The
matter is still under investigation. In the facts and
circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations
made against the appellant, this Court finds that there is
no illegality committed by the learned Sessions Judge
rejecting the prayer of the appellant seeking anticipatory
bail. The appellant threatening or influencing the
victims, if anticipatory bail is granted, cannot be ruled
out. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LL/HB
