Allowed

Smt Jayanthi v. State by

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2024CRL.A/1779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under Section 14(A)(2) SC/ST Act against rejection of regular bail in a brothel-running case involving ITP Act and SC/ST Act offences. The High Court held that offences were not punishable with death or life imprisonment, investigation was largely complete, and stringent bail conditions could address prosecution apprehensions. Appeal allowed; accused granted bail on conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 21.09.2024 rejecting bail set aside; appellant-accused ordered released on bail in Crime No.335/2024 on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety, subject to conditions.

Smt Jayanthi Vs State by — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:41511 CRL.A No. 1779 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1779 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. JAYANTHI W/O LATE GANESH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT No.496/2, BSK 3^RD STAGE ITAMADU, BANGALORE SOUTH BENGALURU – 560 085.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI RAVIKUMARA B R, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE BY GIRI NAGAR PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING – 560 001.

¶14

Digitally signed by HEMAVATHY GANGABYRAPPA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SRI SURYA KANTHA S/O DHANNU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS POLICE CONSTABLE GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU – 560 085.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI B LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

¶18

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.09.2024 PASSED BY THE HONBLE LXX ADDITIONAL CITY

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41511 CRL.A No. 1779 of 2024

¶20

CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT BENGALURU IN CR.NO.335/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY GRANTING THE REGULAR BAIL TO THE APPELLANT IN CR.No.335/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143 OF BNS ACT AND SECTION 3, 4, 5 OF ITP ACT AND SECTION 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PENDING BEFORE HON’BLE THE COURT OF LXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT BENGALURU.

¶21

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

This appeal is filed by the sole accused praying to set aside the order dated 21.09.2024 passed by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru(CCH-71) in crime No.335/2024 of Girinagar Police Station registered for offences punishable under Section 143 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (Hereinafter referred as to “BNSS Act” for brevity) Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (Hereinafter referred as to “ITP Act” for brevity) and Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41511 CRL.A No. 1779 of 2024

¶26

1989 (Hereinafter referred as to “SC and ST Act” for brevity) came to be rejected.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the appellant –

¶28

accused and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents.

¶29

There was raid on the premises of the appellant –accused wherein she was found running brothel by using girls of other States and girls used by the appellant – accused for prostitution belongs to Scheduled Caste. The appellant –accused has been arrested on the same day i.e. 05.09.2024 and she is in judicial custody. The appellant –

¶30

accused filed bail application and same came to be rejected by impugned order, which is challenged in this appeal.

¶31

Learned counsel for the appellant –accused

¶32

would contend that the appellant –accused is women aged 43 years and allegations made against her are false. She has been granted interim bail by the Special Court and after period of interim bail she has surrendered and she has not violated any of conditions imposed while granting

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41511 CRL.A No. 1779 of 2024

¶34

of interim bail. Major portion of the investigation is over and this appellant –accused is not required for custodial investigation. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellant –accused.

¶35

Per contra , learned High Court Government

¶36

Pleader for respondents would contend that appellant – accused is found running brothel in her house by using girls of other States. If she is granted bail she will repeat the similar offence. With this, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

¶37

Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶38

perused the impugned order and other materials placed on the record.

¶39

The offences alleged against the appellant – accused are not punishable with death or imprisonment for

¶40

life. The appellant –accused has been arrested on 05.09.2024 and she is in judicial custody. The appellant – accused is women aged 43 years. As major portion of the investigation is over, this appellant –accused is not required for custodial interrogation. The apprehension of

¶41

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41511 CRL.A No. 1779 of 2024

¶42

the prosecution is that, if the appellant –accused is granted bail, she will repeat similar offence can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. Without considering all these aspects, learned Special Judge erred in passing the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. The appellant –accused has made out grounds for

¶43

setting aside the impugned order and grant of bail.

¶44

In the result, the following

¶45

ORDER

¶46

The appeal is allowed.

¶47

The impugned order dated 21.09.2024 passed in

¶48

Crime No.335/2024 of Girinagar Police Station by the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru is set aside. Consequently, the appellantaccused is ordered to be released on bail in crime No. 335/2024 of Girinagar Police Station subject to the following conditions:

¶49