Karnataka High Court
Revansiddappa S/O Sangappa Kubasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7304
CRL.P No. 101828 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101828 OF 2025
(439 OF Cr.PC)/483 OF BNSS)
BETWEEN:
REVANSIDDAPPA
S/O. SANGAPPA KUBASAD,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: EMPLOYED IN PVT. COMPANY,
R/AT. S. M. KRISHNA NAGAR,
DIST. GADAG-582101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI GOURISHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
GADAG WOMEN POLICE STATION, GADAG,
REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580001.
Digitally signed
by RAKESH S
HARIHAR
Location: High
...RESPONDENTS
Court of
Karnataka,
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
Dharwad
Bench SHRI PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADV. ASSISTING HCGP;
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C. (U/SEC.483 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON REGULAR BAIL AS ATTACHED IN GADAG
WOMAN POLICE STATION CRIME NO.10/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE
OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT GADAG IN
S.C.NO.94/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.376(2) (F) (N)
AND 417 OF IPC IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7304
CRL.P No. 101828 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State
and Sri Prashant S. Kadadevar learned assisting counsel.
2. This petition is filed by the accused under Section
439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ("Cr.P.C." for short)
for granting of bail in S.C.No.94/2024 pending on the file of
learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, arising
out of Crime No.10/2024 of Gadag Women Police Station
registered for the offence punishable under section
376(2)(f)(n) and 417 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that:
The accused is none other than the paternal uncle of the
victim. There was living-in-relationship between the accused
and the victim and out of the said relationship, a child by
name Akshay was born on 07.05.2019. Even after birth of
Akshay, the accused repeatedly made sexual assault on
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7304
HC-KAR
victim. Hence, she lodged the complaint on 25.06.2024
against the accused. Thus, the case has been registered. The
Investigating Officer after conducting the investigation, filed
charge sheet against the accused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended
that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is falsely
implicated in the case. There is a property dispute between
the victim and the accused. The victim is involved in a
murder case. The petitioner hails from a respectable family
and he would abide by the conditions that may be imposed
by this Court.
5. Per contra, Learned High Court Government
Pleader filed Statement of objections and contended that,
there is a prima facie allegations against the petitioner and
he was involved in the offence. The DNA report clearly
indicates that a child by name Akahay born to accused and
victim on 07.05.2019. There is continuation of sexual
harassment being made by the accused. If the accused is
released on bail, he may tamper the witnesses and may
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7304
HC-KAR
hamper the trial. Hence, she prayed for dismissal of the
petition.
6. The charge sheet reveals that the victim is none
other than the daughter of brother of the accused i.e., her
paternal uncle. He developed illicit relationship with victim on
the premise that the husband of victim is drunker. Thus,
taking undue advantage of the situation, he repeatedly
committed sexual assault on the victim knowing that she is
the daughter of his own brother.
7. A perusal of the medical records and DNA Report
reveal that, in the year 2018, the accused committed sexual
assault on the victim. Thus, the victim gave birth to a child
by name Akshay on 07.05.2019. The DNA report also
corroborates the same. It shows that, there is prima facie
allegation against the petitioner and he is involved in the
case.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner though relied
upon several judgments however all the judgments are not
aptly applicable to the case in hand. Since those judgments
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7304
HC-KAR
were rendered on the premise that there was a promise to
marriage. Whereas, in the present case, the accused is none
other than the paternal uncle of the victim, which prohibited
degree of relationship and he made sexual assault on her
and he continuously harassing her sexually. Thus, there is no
merit in the petition.
Accordingly, criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
EM /CT-AN
