Karnataka High Court
Shri Raju Bades vs Shri Bharamanna Ramappa Badakar on 7 June, 2023
Bench: Anil B Byabkj
-1-
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANIL B KATTI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100063 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SHRI RAJU BADES,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KANAGALI PLOT, SANKESHWAR,
TALUK: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 313.
...APPELLANT
(BY SHRI GANAPATI M. BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI BHARAMANNA RAMAPPA BADAKAR,
Digitally
signed by J
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE,
J
MAMATHA R/O: KESTI VILLAGE,TQ: HUKKERI,
MAMATHA Date: DIST: BELAGAVI-591 313.
2023.06.08
13:14:35 -
0700
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS P.S.I., SANKESHWAR POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLICE PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI CHETAN MUNNOLI AND SURABHI KULKARNI, ADVS.
FOR R1 AND SHRI PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP FOR R2)
***
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 14A(2) OF SC/ST
(POA ACT, 1989) OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE ORDER
DATED 07.01.2023 IN CRL.MISC.NO. 1813/2022 (CRIME NO.
295/2022 OF SANKESHWAR PS) PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-FTSC-I, BELAGAVI IN
CRIME NO. 295/2022 OF SANKESHWAR PS FOR OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/SECS. 354(A), 109, 506 OF IPC AND SEC. 8 OF
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012
AND SEC.3(2)(v)(a) OF THE SC & ST (PREVENTION OF
-2-
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 AND REJECT BAIL TO THE
1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.
295/2022 OF SANKESHWAR PS FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
U/SEC. 354(A), 109, 506 OF IPC AND SEC. 8 OF PROTECTION OF
CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 AND SEC.
3(2)(v)(a) OF THE SC & ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES
AMENDMENT ACT, 2015.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS AND THE SAME
HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON
06.04.2023, THIS DAY, THE COURT, DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Appellant/respondent No.2 feeling aggrieved by the
order passed by the trial Court on the file of Additional
District and Sessions Judge-FTSC-1, Belagavi, in criminal
Misc. No.1813/2022 dated 07.01.2023, preferred this
appeal.
2. Parties to the appeal are referred with their
ranks as assigned in the trial Court for the sake of
convenience.
3. The factual matrix leading to the case of
prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that the
complainant is studying 10th standard in Kannada Medium
Primary and High School of SDVS Sangh. The accused was
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
working as PE teacher and made sexual advances to the
victim and other students on different dates. On
13.12.2022 at abut 9.45 a.m. accused enquired with
victim to whom her friend Amruta is loving and later
kissed the complainant, further threatened not to disclose
same with anyone. On 14.12.2022 after completion of
tuition, accused called victim to PE room, since he wanted
to prepare question paper. The accused again kissed
victim/complainant and warned not to disclose with
anybody. On 20.12.2022 the friends of complainant
Amruta and Palllavi had been to PE room and accused sent
back Pallavi, further put his hand on the shoulder of
Amruta. Thereafter, made enquired with her as to whom
victim/complainant is loving and accused kissed her also.
Thereafter 3 to 4 days, the accused did the same and gave
threat that he will cut internal marks. The said
misbehavior of accused is known to all in the school. On
these allegations complaint was filed. The accused was
arrested during the cross of investigation on 30.12.2022.
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
4. The trial Court by order dated 07.01.2023 in
criminal Misc.1813/2022 granted the bail by imposing
conditions and the same is now challenged by respondent
No.2 in the present appeal.
5. In response to the notice, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.2 and Sri.Chetan
Munnolli, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
6. Respondent No.1 filed objections contending
that the trial Court has rightly appreciated the material
placed before it and was justified in granting the bail. The
complaint averments does not speak about commission of
offence as alleged against the accused. When once the bail
is granted, it would require supervening circumstance for
it's cancellation. Appellant has not made out any
supervening circumstances for seeking cancellation of the
bail. Therefore, prayed for dismiss of appeal.
7. Learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent No.2 orally objects.
8. Heard arguments of both sides.
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
9. On the strength of the complaint filed by the
victim/complainant criminal law was set into motion by
registering case in Sankeshwara, P. S. crime No.295/2022
for the offences punishable under Sections 354(A), 109,
506 of IPC and Section 8 of Protection Of Children From
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v)(a) of the
SC and St (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act,
2015.
10. The accused was arrested on 30.12.2022 and
trial Court by its order dated 07.01.2023 in criminal Misc.
No.1813/2022 granted bail subject to condition. The grant
of said bail is sought to be cancelled by the respondent
No.2 father of the victim contending that the trial Court
has not considered the impact of incident on
victim/complainant, who is preparing for her board
examination. The delay in filing the complaint has been
explained in the complaint itself. The accused is working in
the same school wherein his daughter is studying. The
seriousness of allegations made in the complaint has not
been considered by the trial Court.
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
11. The complaint allegations would go to show that
accused is alleged to have misbehaved with
victim/complainant and other girl students of the school
and further made sexual advances by physically touching
victim/complainant and other girl students, so also under
threat that he will cut of internal marks in the event of
disclosing about the incident to anybody continued to
misbehave with them.
12. Trial Court has taken note of the fact that there
is a delay of about 10 days in filing the complaint. The
accused is working as PE teacher and serving in the same
school for last more than 15 years and has no any criminal
antecedents. The alleged incident took place during
working hours of the school. When it is admitted that the
accused is working in said school as PE teacher, there is
no question of accused calling the victim to PE room for
preparing question paper. The alleged misbehavior of
accused in making sexual advances as alleged in the
complaint is matter of trial. The trial Court by exercising
judicial discretion keeping mind sound principles regarding
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
grant of bail has granted the bail. Looking into the order
passed by the trial Court, it does not appear that the same
has been passed without application of judicious mind.
When once bail has been granted by the Competent Court
having jurisdiction then normally same cannot be
cancelled unless there are overwhelming circumstances.
13. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 in support
of his contention that the bail once granted cannot be
canceled without there being strong and compelling
circumstances relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex
Court in X V/s State of Telangana reported in (2008)
16 SCC 511, wherein it has been observe and held that:
"Very cogent and overwhelming
circumstances are necessary for an order
directing cancellation of bail already granted.
Generally speaking the grounds for
cancellation of bail, broadly (illustrative not
exhaustive) or interference or attempt to
interfere with due course of administration of
justice or evasion or attempt evase the due
course of justice or abuse of succession
granted to accused in any manner
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
satisfaction of Court on basis of material
placed on record of possibility of accused,
absconding is yet another reason justifying
the cancellation of bail. However, bail once
granted should not be granted in a
mechanical manner without considering
whether any supervening circumstances have
been rendered it no longer conducive a fair
trial to allow accused to retain his freedom
by enjoying concession of bail during trial."
14. In the present case, the respondent No.2 has
not made out any cogent and overwhelming circumstances
seeking for cancellation of bail. There is no question of
accused absconding from the process of law, since he is a
permanent teacher and working in the school. There are
no any allegations of accused having misused the bail
granted to him by trial Court. Therefore, I find no valid
reasons to interfere with a judicial discretion exercised by
the trial Court. Consequently, proceed to pass the
following:
CRL.A No. 100063 of 2023
ORDER
Appeal filed by respondent No.2 is here by
dismissed.
The order of first appellate Court on the file
of Additional District and Sessions Judge-FTSC-1,
Belagavi, in criminal Misc. No.1813/2022 dated
07.01.2023 is confirmed.
(Sd/-)
JUDGE
AC/-
