Karnataka High Court
Sri Chethan K S vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
CRL.A No. 1600 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1600 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI CHETHAN K S
S/O SHIVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
R/A No.98, KALLANAKERE
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 423.
ALSO AT:
RAJU BUILDING, NEAR SUNADHA
FACTORY, 7TH CROSS
THIGALARAPALAYA, ANDARAHALLI
BENGALURU - 560 091.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI P JAGANNATHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ATTIBELE P .S
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ATTIBELE, BENGALURU
REP. BY ITS SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AMBEDKAR ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SRI GOVINDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
S/O SRI MUNIYAPPA
R/AT AMBEDKAR COLONY
YADAVANAHALLI
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
CRL.A No. 1600 of 2023
ANEKAL TALUK
PIN CODE - 562 106.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. N ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1
SRI A V RAGHAVENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 - ABSENT)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:20.06.2023,
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.1082/2023 ARISING OUT OF
CR.No.181/2023 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE ON THE
FILE OF THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by appellant - accused No. 4
praying to set aside the order dated 20.06.2023 passed in
Crl.Misc. No. 1082/2023 by II Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru,
whereunder the bail petition of the appellant - accused No.
4 sought in respect of Crime No. 181/2023 of Attibele
Police Station registered for offence under Sections 354-C,
506, 504, 509, 417, 376(1) read with Section 34 of IPC,
Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)(w)i)(ii), 3(1)(r)(s) of SC
ST (POA) Act, 1989 and Sections 66(E) and 67(A) of
Information Technology Act, 2000 came to be rejected.
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
2. Heard learned counsel for appellant - accused
No. 4 and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 - State. Even
though respondent No. 2 is represented by a counsel,
none appeared for respondent No. 2.
3. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the
victim girl, daughter of Sri. Govindappa, got acquainted
with accused No. 1 through social media platform and
taking advantage of the said acquaintance, accused No. 1
with a promise of marriage, committed rape on her
forcibly on several occasions and took obscene pictures
and videos of the victim. Accused No. 2 - mother of the
accused refused to perform the marriage of her son -
accused No. 1 with the victim, on the ground that she
belongs to schedule caste and abused the victim by
referring to her caste. She demanded a car, Rs.10.00
lakhs and to provide a house on lease for performing the
marriage of her son with the victim. Further, accused No.1
informed the victim - C.W.2 over phone that his mother
has driven him out of the house and when victim's mother
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
and her sister did not allow accused No.1 to stay in their
house, with an ulterior motive, to defame the victim,
accused No. 1 sent the nude videos and pictures of the
victim to accused No.3 through whatsapp telling him to
troll the same in instagram and in turn accused No. 3 sent
the same to accused No. 5 who forwarded those pictures
and videos to the mobile phone of accused No. 4 through
whatsapp and the accused No. 4 through his instagram ID
account uploaded it in social media. Appellant - accused
No. 4 who is in judicial custody filed the bail petition and
the same came to be rejected by the impugned order
which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for appellant - accused No. 4
would contend that there is no allegation against this
appellant of committing any offence under the provisions
of SC ST (POA) Act and further submits that investigation
is over, charge sheet has been filed and therefore,
appellant - accused No. 4 is not required for custodial
interrogation. He further submits that accused No. 3 who
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
is similarly placed to that of appellant - accused No. 4 has
been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in
Crl.A. No. 1307/2023 by order dated 08.11.2023.
Therefore, on the ground of parity, he prays for grant of
bail. With this he prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail
to appellant - accused No. 4.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for
respondent No. 1 - State would contend that this
appellant - accused No. 4 has uploaded the nude
photograph and video of the victim girl in social media.
The mobile phone of this appellant - accused No. 4 has
been seized. Charge sheet material show prima facie case
against this appellant - accused No.4 for offence alleged
against him. With this, she prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for appellant -
accused No. 4 and the learned HCGP for respondent No.1
- State, this Court has perused the impugned order, FIR,
complaint and remand application.
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
7. The main allegation of committing rape against
the victim and photographing the act is against accused
No. 1. Initially FIR was registered against accused No.1
and his mother, i.e., accused No. 2. It is alleged that there
is obscene pictures and video taken by accused No.1 and
he has stored the same in his mobile and sent to the
mobile of his brother Dharshan. Accused No. 3 got shared
the said photographs and video from the mobile of
Darshan to his mobile and sent it to accused No. 5 through
whatsapp. Accused No. 5 inturn sent the same to accused
No. 4 who is the appellant herein. This appellant - accused
No. 4 has uploaded the said photographs and video in
instagram through his ID. Mobile phone of this appellant -
accused No. 4 has been seized and subjected to P.F. No.
313/2023 and the same has been sent to FSL. Appellant -
accused No.4 was arrested on 02.06.2023 and since then,
he is in judicial custody. He has already been interrogated
and mobile phone belonging to him has been seized. He is
not required for further investigation/interrogation.
Investigation is completed and charge sheet is already
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
filed. The allegation that the appellant - accused No. 4 has
uploaded the photographs and video sent to him by
accused No. 5 through whatsapp has to be established by
the prosecution during trial. The appellant - accused No.4
has no criminal antecedents and his further detention in
custody may not be necessary.
8. For the reasons stated supra, the appellant -
accused No.4 has made out grounds for setting aside the
impugned order and grant of bail subject to conditions.
9. In the result, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
20.06.2023 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 1082/2023 by II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural
District, Bengaluru is set aside. The appellant - accused
No. 4 is directed to be released on bail subject to the
following conditions:
NC: 2024:KHC:5729
I. The appellant - accused No. 4 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees
One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court.
II. The appellant - accused No. 4 shall not tamper with
the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.
III. The appellant - accused No.4 shall not try to
influence or threaten the victim in any manner.
IV. The appellant - accused No. 4 shall furnish the proof
of his residential address and shall inform the Court
if there is change in the address.
V. The appellant - accused No.4 shall attend the Court
on all dates of hearing unless exempted and
cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LRS
