Karnataka High Court
Oblesh Alias Hottiga S/O Basappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 January, 2025
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
CRL.P No. 100073 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 100074 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100073 OF 2025
[438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS)]
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100074 OF 2025
[438(CR.PC)/482(BNSS)]
IN CRL.P.NO.100073/2025:
BETWEEN:
OBLESH @ HOTTIGA S/O. BASAPPA,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. FARMER,
R/O. BYRADEVARAGUDDA VILLAGE,
KOTTUR TALUKA,
DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583201.
... PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
MANJANNA
MANJANNA E
(BY SRI SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
E Date:
2025.01.25
14:57:24
+0530
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH KOTTUR POLICE STATION,
TALUKA-KOTTUR,
DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583201.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.
(SECTION 482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
CRL.P No. 100073 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 100074 of 2025
BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IN THE EVENT OF
HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.167/2024 OF KOTTUR POLICE
STATION, ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
COURT, KUDLIGI REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/S. 137(2), 64(2)(M), 351(2), 74, 78, 54 R/W 3(5) OF BNS.
IN CRL.P.NO.100074/2025:
BETWEEN:
BELDARI RAMA @ G.RAMESHA S/O. G.MAREPPA,
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. MANAGAPURA VILLAGE,
TALUKA-KOTTUR, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583201.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH KOTTUR POLICE STATION,
TALUKA: KOTTUR, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583201.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 438 OF CR.P.C.
(SECTION 482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY
BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 IN THE EVENT OF
HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.167/2024 OF KOTTUR POLICE
STATION, ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
COURT, KUDLIGI, VIJAYNAGAR, REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S. 137(2), 64(2)(M), 351(2), 74, 78,
54 R/W 3(5) OF BNS.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
CRL.P No. 100073 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 100074 of 2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI)
These petitions are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS' for short) for
anticipatory bail in Crime no.167/2024 registered by Kottur
Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 137 (2),
64 (2) (m), 351 (2), 74, 78, 54 and 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (for short, 'BNS), by accused no.2 and 3 ('petitioners'
for short) respectively.
2. Sri Srinivas B. Naik learned counsel for petitioners
submitted, petitioners were 26 year old agriculturist and 19
year old student respectively, innocent law abiding citizens,
having deep roots in society and permanent residents of
Byradevaragudda village and Managapura village having
movable and immovable properties. It was submitted they were
not involved or committed any offences including ones alleged
against them herein. And that they were falsely implicated with
intention only to harm their reputation.
3. It was submitted petitioners were however
apprehending arrest in view of registration of false complaint
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
against them for non bailable offences as mentioned above. It
was further submitted even as per complaint filed by
Smt.Mangala at about 7:00 p.m. on 20.09.2024 alleging that
about 3 months earlier accused no.1 - Chandrappa who was
residing in their village was working as agriculturist. It was
submitted accused no.1 used to stalk her and touch her despite
her resistance. At about 7:00 p.m. on 16.09.2024 when
complainant was returning home after attending natures call in
field behind her home, Chandrappa grabbed her, closed her
mouth preventing her from calling for help and thereafter had
sexual intercourse forcibly. He detained her and had sexual
intercourse with her once again at 12:00 a.m. and at 5.00 a.m.
on 17.09.2024, he called accused no.2 - Obalesh and got him
to drop himself and victim near a temple on outskirts of
Nagalapur. He had sexual intercourse with victim once again in
a nearby field. Thereafter he told her, in case she went back to
her village her reputation would be spoiled and called accused
no.3 - Rama. After he came, they dropped her at 8:00 p.m.,
near her native place - Katinakamba village. She went to her
maternal home and stayed until a day prior to filing of
complaint, when her mother took her to her husband. And after
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
she narrated above events to her husband, she was taken to
police station and registered complaint. Based on said
complaint, Crime no.167/2024 (supra) was registered.
4. It was submitted, even as per complaint, role of
petitioners was only to transport victim and accused no.1 from
one place to another without any allegation of ill-will. It was
pointed out that entire allegations in complaint were directed
against accused no.1 who was already enlarged on bail by
order dated 15.11.2024 passed by III Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Ballari (Sitting at Hosapete), in
Crl.Misc.no.5667/2024. Therefore petitioners, against whom
there were no serious allegations, were entitled for bail. It was
further submitted prosecution had completed investigation and
filed charge sheet on 29.10.2024. Therefore, there would be no
need for presence of petitioners for custodial interrogation. On
above ground sought for allowing petitions.
5. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent - State sought to oppose
petitions. It was submitted, complaint averments included all
essential ingredients to substantiate offences alleged. It was
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
submitted nature of offences alleged were serious committed
against woman and were heinous in nature. And though
complaint allegations were mainly against accused no.1, when
petitioners had transported accused no.1 and victim on their
motorcycles, they had abetted commission of offences.
Moreover, accused were also charged with offence under
Section 3 (5) of BNS. In view of above, even ground that there
were no antecedents would not inure to them. On other hand if
they were granted anticipatory bail, there was likelihood of
their fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution
material/witnesses. Hence, there was no merit in bail
application and sought rejection.
6. Heard learned counsel and perused available
material on record.
7. From above, point that would arise for consideration
is:
"Whether petitioners are entitled for
anticipatory bail on conditions?"
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
8. From above, it is seen, petitioners' apprehension
about imminent arrest for non-bailable offences is with
reference to Crime no.167/2024 (supra).
9. Though nature of offences alleged against accused
are serious and heinous, they are mainly against accused no.1
and prima facie only charge of abetment directed against
petitioners. Admittedly, accused no.1 has succeeded in getting
bail. Therefore, when petitioners cannot be stated to be in any
worse situation that accused no.1, it would only be proper to
avail said relief to them on parity.
10. Besides, fact that there are no criminal antecedents
and petitioners are permanent residents of Byradevaragudda
and Managapura village respectively having immovable
properties would also inure to them. And since charge-sheet is
already filed, there would no requirement of their presence for
custodial interrogation and concerns of prosecution could be
mitigated by appropriate conditions. Thus, point for
consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, following:
ORDER
Both petitions are allowed. It is ordered that
petitioners - accused no.2 and 3 shall be enlarged on
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1389
bail, in case of their arrest in Crime no.167/2024
registered by Kottur Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2) (m), 351
(2), 74, 78, 54 and 3 (5) of BNS, subject to following
conditions:
a) Petitioners shall appear before jurisdictional
Court within 15 days from date of this order
and execute personal bond for sum of
Rs.50,000/- with one surety each for
likesum to satisfaction of Court.
b) They shall appear before Investigating
Officer for purpose of further investigation
as and when required.
c) They shall attend Court proceedings
regularly.
d) They shall not threaten, tamper with or
influence prosecution witnesses, either
directly or indirectly.
e) They shall not leave jurisdiction of Court
without prior permission, until completion of
trial.
f) They shall not indulge in any criminal
activities.
g) It is clarified that all observations herein are
prima facie for purposes of this order and
would not bind trial Court at time of passing
final judgment.
SD/-
(RAVI V.HOSMANI)
JUDGE
RH/EM
CT:PA
