Karnataka High Court
Rakshith R R vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 January, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
CRL.A No. 2255 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2255 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
RAKSHITH R R
S/O R.M. RAMESH
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/AT NO. 48, RUDRAKSHIPURA VILLAGE
ATHAGURU HOBLI, SOMANAHALLI POST
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 429.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI K HEMANTH KUMAR K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BELAKAWADI POLICE
MANDYA
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Digitally signed by HIGH COURT BUILDING
LAKSHMINARAYANA BENGALURU - 560 001.
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. LAKSHMI K.G
KARNATAKA
D/O GOPALKRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
WORKING AS PRIVATE TEACHER
KIRAGASURU VILLAGE
B. G PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUQ
MANDYA - 571 429.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1
SRI HANUMANTHARAYA K S, ADVOCATE
SRI K R POORNA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
CRL.A No. 2255 of 2023
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2023
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE MANDYA AND GRANT ON ORDER OF
ANTICIPATORY BAIL BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT/
BELAKAVADI POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.94/2023 FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S.376(2)(n),420,504,506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC
AND SECTION 3(1)(r),3(1)(s),3(1)(w)(i)(ii) AND 3(2)(va) OF
SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT 2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
MANDYA.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused No.1
praying to set aside the order dated 17.11.2023 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.934/2023 by the V Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Mandya, whereunder the anticipatory bail
petition of this appellant/accused No.1 sought in respect of
crime No.94/2021 of Belakavadi Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 504, 506 r/w 34
of Indian Penal Code (for short hereinafter referred to as
`IPC') and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of
the Schedule Cast and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short hereinafter referred to as
`SC and ST Act), came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-accused
No.1, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned
HCGP for respondent No.1-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that respondent
No.2 has filed complaint stating that the appellant-accused
No.1 was her colleague at her work place and they become
friends and gradually started loving each other and they
were in contact over phone. Further she has stated that on
27.09.2020 she was alone at home, appellant-accused No.1
made a phone call to her and expressed willingness to come
her house for which she refused stating that nobody is there
at her home but still the appellant-accused No.1 entered her
home had cup of tea and thereafter he forcible had sexual
intercourse with her. He has taken photos from his mobile
and threatened to her not to tell about the incident to
anybody otherwise he will upload photos in social media.
She has further stated that she had paid money to the
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
appellant-accused No.1 by pledging her gold ornaments for
sum of Rs.5,20,000/-. She has further stated that he
frequently visited her house. On 28.02.2021, he came to her
house at about 8.30 p.m. and had forcible sexual intercourse
with her. On 08.01.2021 in view of his birthday he took her
along with his family members to Dharmastala,
Kukkesubramanya and Adichunchanagiri temples.
Subsequently, on 23.09.2023 he made a phone call and
informed that his marriage engagement was taken place
with another girl to respondent No.2. On 06.10.2023 at
about 12.00 noon she went along with one Pushpalatha and
enquired with accused persons where accused Nos.2 to 4
abused her in filthy language taking her caste and gave life
threat to her. The said complaint came to be registered in
Crime No.94/2023 of Belakavadi Police Station for the
offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 504, 506
r/w 34 of IPC and 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of
the SC and ST Act. The Police after further investigation filed
charge sheet against accused persons. The appellant-
accused No.1 apprehending his arrest filed
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
Crl.Misc.No.934/2023 seeking anticipatory bail along with
accused Nos.2 and 3 and his anticipatory bail petition came
to be rejected by the impugned order dated 17.11.2023. The
said order is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1
would contend that the alleged incidents of forcible sexual
intercourse have taken place in the year 2020 and 2021 and
there is no complaint filed by this respondent No.2. The
complaint filed in the year 2023 is belated one. He contends
that in the averments of the complaint there is no allegation
against this appellant-accused No.1 for committing the
offence punishable under Section 3 of the SC and ST Act.
Therefore, bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act is not
applicable. As the charge sheet is filed this appellant-
accused No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation. The
appellant-accused No.1 is ready to co-operate with
investigation agency in further investigation if any. Without
considering all these aspects, learned Session/Special Judge
has passed an impugned order which requires interference
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
by this Court. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and
grant anticipatory bail to the appellant-accused No.1.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader and learned counsel for respondent No.2 both
submits that the appellant-accused No.1 on the promise of
marriage had sexual intercourse with the victim girl.
Thereafter the appellant-accused No.1 did not keep up his
promise and refused to marry her and got engaged with
another girl. The averments of the complaint and statement
of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C shows
the act of physical contact is not consensual and is forcible
act. As there was threat to upload her nude photos hence
she did not file any complaint against this appellant-accused
No.1. The mobile phone of this appellant-accused No.1 is
required to be seized for investigation and investigation has
to be under taken regarding pledging of the gold ornaments
by the complainant and lending money to the appellant-
accused No.1. There is bar under Section 18 of the SC and
ST Act. Considering all these aspects, learned Special Judge
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
has rightly rejected the anticipatory bail petition of the
appellant-accused No.1. With this, they prayed for dismissal
of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsels for parties, the
Court has perused the impugned order and charge sheet
materials.
7. As per averments of the complaint, the appellant-
accused no.1 and victim girl are friends and there is love
affair between them. As per averments of the complaint, the
appellant-accused No.1 had sexual intercourse with the
victim girl on 27.09.2020 and on 28.02.2021. Even though,
it is alleged that the said sexual intercourse is forcible, the
victim girl did not choose to file complaint against appellant-
accused No.1. It appears that the said sexual intercourse is
consensual. As appellant-accused No.1 has refused to marry
the victim girl, she choose to file compliant against
appellant/accused No.1. There is no allegation against this
appellant-accused No.1 of abusing the victim girl taking her
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
caste and insulting her, the said allegations are against
other accused persons. So far as offence punishable under
Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) are concerned if the alleged act is
consensual such offence is not attracted as per proviso to
said Section 3(2)(w) of SC and ST Act. Therefore, at the
stage it can be said that offence under Section 3(2)(w)(i)(ii)
of the SC and ST act does not attract. Therefore, bar under
Section 18 of the SC and ST is not attracted. As charge
sheet is filed appellant-accused No.1 is not required for
custodial interrogation. If the appellant-accused No.1 is
required for further investigation, he has under taken to
cooperate with investigation agency in further investigation
if any. Without considering all these aspects, learned
Sessions/Special Judge has passed impugned order which
requires interference by this Court.
8. The appellant-accused No.1 has made grounds for
setting aside the impugned order and grant of anticipatory
bail. In the result, the following
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
ORDER
The appeal is allowed.
The order dated 17.11.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.
No.934/2023 by the V Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Mandya is set aside. Anticipatory Bail petition stands
allowed. The appellant-accused No.1 is ordered to be
released on bail in the event of his arrest in crime
No.94/2021 of Belakavadi Police Station subject to the
following conditions:
i. Appellant - accused No.1 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
jurisdictional Court.
ii. Appellant-accused No.1 shall appear
voluntarily before the jurisdictional Court
within 15 days from today and execute
bail bond and furnish surety.
iii. Appellant-accused No.1 shall not
threaten the complainant and other
prosecution witnesses.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:1179
iv. Appellant-accused No.1 shall cooperate
with investigation agency in further
investigation if any.
v. Appellant-accused No. 1 shall attend the
Court on all dates of hearing unless
exempted and cooperate in speedy
disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DSP
