Allowed

Basavaraj S/O Shankrappa Gulannanavar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Sept 2023CRL.A/100405/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the criminal appeal for bail in a case involving IPC and SC/ST (POA) Act offences. The court set aside the lower court order and granted bail subject to conditions including a personal bond, non-contact with the prosecutrix, and prohibitions on witness tampering and criminal activities.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside. Appellant enlarged on bail subject to personal bond, non-contact, address reporting, no witness tampering, and attendance conditions.

Basavaraj S/O Shankrappa Gulannanavar Vs the State of… — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100405 OF 2023 (U/S 14 A(2) of

¶7

SC and ST ACT-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

BASAVARAJ S/O SHANKRAPPA GULANNANAVAR AGE 29 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O HOTANAHALLI, TQ SHIGGAON, DIST HAVERI 581205.

¶10

...APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI.V M BANAKAR, ADV.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,

¶14

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2023.09.26 10:40:00 +0530

¶15

HAVERI WOMEN POLICE STATION

¶16

HAVERI,

¶17

DIST HAVERI,

¶18

RPTD BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD 580 011.

¶19

2 . HEMAVATI HANAMANTAPPA RNGAMMANAVAR

¶20

AGE 27 YEARS, OCC : DATA ENTRY OPERATOR, BRC OFFICE, BYADAGI, R/O: TEREDAHALLI,

¶21

¶22

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶23

TQ BYADAGI-581106, DIST HAVERI.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SMT GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 SERVED)

¶26

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL AND PASS AN ORDER TO ENLARGE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 ON REGULAR BAIL, IN HAVERI WOMEN P.S. CRIME NO.43/2023 ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JDUGE AND SPL. JUDGE, HAVERI FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 323, 354, 376(2)(n), 420, 504, 506 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND U/S 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (PA) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 AND U/S 67(A) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2008 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 23.08.2023 PASSED IN HAVERI WOMAN P.S.CRI.MISC.NO.43/2023 BY I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT HAVERI.

¶27

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

Appellant who is arraigned as accused No.1 has filed this appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short, ‘the SC/ST (POA) Act’) to grant him bail in Crime No.43/2023 of Haveri Women Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 376(2)(n), 420, 504, 506 read with Section 34

¶30

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶31

of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and under Section 67(a) of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008.

¶32

In support of the appeal, appellant has contended that he is innocent of the offences alleged. There is delay of more than 5 years in filing the complaint and no legal or acceptable reasons are forthcoming for the delay. When the alleged incident dated 20.06.2023 took place in the house of the appellant, he was not present. As on the date of alleged incident, the prosecutrix was aged 25 years. Only to blackmail him, a false complaint is filed. Appellant is having aged parents, owning movable and immovable properties and deep root in the society. There are no chances of he absconding. He is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and prays to allow the appeal and grant him bail.

¶33

After due service of notice, respondent No.2 has

¶34

appeared and filed objections.

¶35

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶36

Respondent No.1-State is represented by

¶37

learned High Court Government Pleader.

¶38

Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted oral objections stating that the prosecutrix i.e., respondent No.2 is working as Data Entry Operator at BRC Office, Byadagi since 6 years. She came in contact with the appellant during 2019 and they fell in love with each other. During 2019, appellant took her to Ashoka Lodge, Haveri and committed rape on her. After sometime he took her to Kaveri Lodge of Haveri and raped her. During the period when he was putting up construction of his house, he borrowed Rs.5 lakhs i.e., she paid Rs.2 lakhs through phone-pe and Rs.3 lakhs in cash.

¶39

Though she objected, he repeatedly had sexual

¶40

intercourse with her by blackmailing her that he is having her nude photographs and that he would upload them to the social media. When she insisted him to marry her, he abused her saying that she belonged to scheduled caste and that his family members would not agree for their

¶41

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶42

marriage. In this background, on 20.06.2023 at 6.10 p.m. prosecutrix along with her uncles Siddappa and Ramanna Talawar went to the house of appellant and disclosed the fact of appellant having cheated her, his mother, sisters and brother-in-law (accused Nos. 2 to 5) assaulted her with hands, pulled her hair and referring to her caste abused her in filthy language. They gave threat to her life. After resting in the house and consulting the elders of her community, she has lodged the complaint on 25.06.2023. The allegations against the appellant are very grave. After conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed. In the event of granting bail, appellant may threaten or tamper with the witnesses and also abscond and prays to reject the appeal.

¶43

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶44

From the material placed on record, it is evident

¶45

that both appellant and complainant are working as Data Entry Operators and came in contact with each other. According to the prosecutrix, the first incident took place

¶46

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶47

in 2019. At the time of filing the complaint, she was aged 25 years. Consequently, when the alleged incident of 2019 took place, she was a major. According to the prosecutrix from 2019 the appellant repeatedly had sexual intercourse with her on several occasions by taking her to different lodges. Though she has alleged that the act of appellant having physical relationship with her was forcible, admittedly she has not lodged the complaint after the first incident. She has also claimed that appellant had promised to marry her. Having regard to these specific averments, it appears to be consensual physical relationship between them. Only after the appellant has refused to marry her, she has chosen to file the complaint. It appears appellant has borrowed money from her for construction of the house and after he refused to return the same, it is alleged that with the intention of cheating her he has taken money.

¶48

So far as the allegations against the accused Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, it is alleged that when

¶49

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶50

prosecutrix went to their house and disclosed her relationship with the appellant, they abused her in filthy language referring to her caste, assaulted her with hands, pulled her hair and gave threat to her life. They are already granted anticipatory bail in Crl.A.No.100339/2023.

¶51

After conducting detailed investigation, charge

¶52

sheet is filed against the appellant as well as the remaining accused. Consequently, no longer the custodial presence of appellant is required for investigation. Ofcourse there is apprehension on the part of the prosecution that appellant may threaten or tamper with the witnesses. Having regard to the fact that the main witnesses are the prosecutrix and her uncles and as such the possibility of tampering them is remote. Ofcourse the interest of prosecution is required to be safeguarded by imposing stringent conditions and accordingly the following:

¶53

ORDER

¶54

Criminal Appeal is allowed.

¶55

¶56

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11237 CRL.A No. 100405 of 2023

¶57

The impugned order dated 23.08.2023 passed by the learned I Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Haveri, is setaside.

¶58

The appellant/accused No.1 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.43/2023 of Haveri Women Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 376(2)(n), 420, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and under Section 67(a) of Information

¶59

Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, subject to following:

¶60

CONDITIONS

¶61