Allowed

Shantagouda v. the State through

Karnataka HC17 Dec 2024CRL.A/200256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bail appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act by a flour-mill owner facing rape charges against a ten-year-old girl under IPC, POCSO and SC/ST Act. With prolonged pre-trial detention and trial unlikely to commence early, the court held he established a prima facie case and allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant enlarged on bail in Crime No.59/2021 pending Sessions Court Special Case No.67/2021, subject to conditions.

Shantagouda Vs the State through — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9755 CRL.A No. 200256 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200256 OF 2023 (U/S 14 (A))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHANTAGOUDA S/O HANAMANTHRAYA, POLICE BIRADAR, AGE 42 YEARS, OCC: FLOUR MILL, R/O: VILLAGE: HULKAL (K) TQ. SHAHAPUR, DIST. YADGIR, BIDAR - 585287.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. NANDKISHORE BOOB, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE THROUGH BHEEMARAYANGUDI PS, YADGIR NOW REPRESENTING BY ADDL. SPP HCKB AT KALABURAGI.

¶15

SMT. BHARATIBAI W/O POOLSINGH JADHAV, AGE 35 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER, R/O. VILLAGE, HOTPET NADUVINA TANDA, TQ. SHAHAPUR, DIST. SHAHAPUR - 585287.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1, SMT. VIJAYA M. PATIL, ADV. FOR R2.)

¶17

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT, PRAYING TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED ON BAIL BY

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9755 CRL.A No. 200256 of 2023

¶20

SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2021 IN CRIME NO. 59/2021 OF BHEEMARAYANGUDI PS YADGIR, PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE SESSIONS JUDGE AT YADGIR, IN SPL. CASE NO. 67/2021 FOR THE U/SE. 342, 376(A)(B), 504, 506 IPC AND 6 OF POCSO ACT 2012 AND 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST ACT 1989, IN VIEW OF THE REASONS AS STATED ABOVE.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

The appellant, who is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376AB, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act' and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(V) & 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC and ST Act') is before this Court under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC and ST Act to enlarge him on bail.

¶25

The prosecution’s case is that on 17.08.2021, at approximately 6:00 PM, while the complainant was passing in front of the house of Shanthabai, wife of Devaraj, Shanthabai informed the complainant that on 16.08.2021, at around 3:00 PM, when she went to the flour mill owned by Shantagouda, she found the door of the flour mill locked from the inside. When she looked through the window of the flour mill, Shantgouda was having sexual intercourse with her

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:9755 CRL.A No. 200256 of 2023

¶27

daughter. When she knocked on the door, Shantagouda opened it after some time, and she saw that her daughter was dressed. Upon enquiry, the daughter narrated that when she had been to flour mill to bring flour, the appellant/Shantagouda forcibly closed her mouth with his hands and abused her in the name of her caste and committed rape on her and threatened her not to disclose to anybody, otherwise, he would finish her.

¶28

The victim is allegedly aged 10 years as on the date of incident.

¶29

The appellant has been in custody since 20.08.2021 as of today, and charges are yet to be framed.

¶30

The trial is not likely to commence at the earliest, and the prolonged pre-trial detention will be an anathema to the concept of liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶31

In the light of the above circumstances, the petitioner has established prima facie case to enlarge him on bail.

¶32

Hence, the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The Criminal Appeal is allowed . The appellant/ accused is enlarged on bail in Crime No.59/2021 registered by

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9755 CRL.A No. 200256 of 2023

¶37

Bheemarayanagudi Police Station, Yadgir pending on the file of Sessions Judge, Yadgir in Special Case No.67/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376AB, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 4 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of SC and ST Act, subject to the following conditions.

¶38