Karnataka High Court
Sri Mahalinge Gowda @ Sagar vs State Of Karnataka By on 31 March, 2023
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 382 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. MAHALINGE GOWDA @ SAGAR
S/O NINGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
R/AT KALGERE VILLAGE
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 116.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRAKASHA K V, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU-560 040
REP. BY- S.P.P.
Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI BANGALORE-560 001.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. SMT.SAVITHA
KARNATAKA
W/O LATE KRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/AT MALLIGER VILLAGE
DUDDA HOBLI
MANDYA TALUK & DISTRICT-571 401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.196/2022 REGISTERED BY CHANDRA LAYOUT IN
(SPL.C.C.NO.2148/2022) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.376,
376(2)(N) AND 420 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w),
3(i)(ii) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989 BENGALURU PENDING ON
THE HON'BLE COURT OF LXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE SPECIAL JUDGE BENGALURU (CCH-71) BY
SET ASIDE THE ORDER IN CRL.MISC.NO.619/2023 DATED
04.02.2023.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the sole accused praying to set
aside the order dated 04.02.2023 passed in Crl.Misc. No.
619/2023 by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge and Special Judge, (CCH No. 71) Bengaluru where
under the bail application of the appellant - accused
sought in respect of Crl. Misc. No. 619/2023 for the
offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(N) and
420 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(i)(ii)
of the SC ST (POA) Act, 1989, came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for appellant - accused and
learned HCGP for respondent No. 1 - State. Inspite of
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
service of notice, respondent No. 2 remained
unrepresented.
3. Case of the prosecution is that the victim and the
appellant - accused came in contact through phone in the
year 2018 and thereafter, they fell in love and
subsequently the appellant - accused has committed
forcible sexual intercourse on the victim girl under the
promise of marriage when she was alone in the house due
to which she became pregnant. When the victim girl
disclosed the fact of her pregnancy to the appellant -
accused with a demand for marriage, the appellant -
accused refused to marry her and insulted her
intentionally to humiliate her with reference to caste
name. The appellant - accused came to be arrested and
he is in judicial custody. He filed bail petition which came
to be rejected by the Special Court by the impugned order
which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for appellant - accused would
contend that the blood sample of the appellant - accused,
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
victim girl and child of the victim girl has been colleted and
sent for DNA test. The test report reveal that the appellant
- accused is not the biological father of the child born to
the victim girl. Without considering this aspect the Special
Court has rejected the bail petition by the impugned order
which requires interference by this Court. With this he
prayed to allow the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that the
DNA test report is not the conclusive proof and the charge
sheet material show prima facie case against the appellant
- accused. With this he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant
- accused and the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 -
State this Court has gone through the charge sheet
records.
7. The accusation leveled against the appellant -
accused is that he committed forcible sexual intercourse
on the victim girl due to which she became pregnant and
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
gave birth to a child. The DNA test report reveal that the
appellant - accused is not the biological father of the child
born to the victim girl. The Special Court has not
considered the DNA test report stating that it is not the
conclusive proof. More so, it is a case of love affair
between the appellant - accused and the victim girl.
Whether this appellant - accused has committed forcible
sexual intercourse on the victim girl or not is a matter of
trial. As charge sheet is filed, the appellant - accused is
not required for custodial interrogation. The apprehension
of the prosecution that if the appellant - accused is
granted bail there are chances of he threatening the
prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing
stringent conditions. Therefore, appellant - accused has
made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order
and granting bail to him with conditions. Hence, I proceed
to pass the following;
ORDER
Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
04.02.2023 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 619/2023 by the LXX
CRL.A No. 382 of 2023
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge,
(CCH N. 71) Bengaluru is set aside. Consequently, the bail
petition of the appellant - accused stands allowed and he
is ordered to be released on bail in crime No. 196/2022 of
Chandra Layout Police Station subject to the following
conditions:
i. The appellant - accused shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh
(Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for
the likesum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
ii. The appellant - accused shall not indulge in
tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii. The appellant - accused shall attend the
Court on all the dates of hearing unless
exempted by the Court and cooperate for the
speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LRS
