IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2019, BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL PETITION No.3202 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
M.C.Mahadeva S/o. Late MuddhiChowdaiah, Aged about 50 years, R/o. Kadukothanahalli Village, C.A.Kere Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District – 571 430.
Also at:
#635, 2nd Block, Jnanabharathi Layout, Mariyappanapalya, Bengaluru South, Bangaluru Viswavidalaya, Bengaluru-560 056.
(By Sri. Kemparaju, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By K.M.Doddi Police Station, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Complex, Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri. Nasrullakhan, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.85/2019 of K.M.Doddi Police Station, Mandya for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 417, 376, 323, 506 R/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Learned High Court Government Pleader who has taken notice for the respondent-State has submitted his oral objections.
2. Perused the materials placed before this Court.
3. Heard the learned counsel from both side.
4. The complainant claims herself to be the victim of the alleged sexual assault said to have been made upon her by accused No.1. The present petitioner is accused No.2 who is said to be the elder brother of accused No.1.
5. The summary of the allegations made against the accused by the complainant is that, on the pretext of marrying her, the accused No.1 subjected her to repetitive sexual assault and the present petitioner as accused No.2 and the elder brother of accused No.1 was advising the accused No.1 as to how to extinguish the evidences of the alleged commission of sexual assault upon the victim.
6. A reading of the first information which is said to be the complaint given by the victim before the respondent - Police which runs into several pages, at this stage does not show any direct and overt act attributed to the present petitioner who is accused No.2. On the other hand, all the acts said to have been attributed are against accused No.1 who is also shown to have threatened the victim girl by taking the name of his elder brother who is the present petitioner.
As such, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage and prima facie, those statements said to have been made by accused No.1 even though are said to have been at the advice of his elder brother, they cannot be taken at their facial value as though the present petitioner - accused No.2 himself has done it. The same requires a full-fledged trial in order to ascertain the truthfulness in those allegations. As such, merely because a reference is there to the name of the present petitioner as the elder brother of accused No.1, by that itself it cannot be concluded that the present petitioner stands on the same footing as that of the accused No.1. Thus, by evaluating the complaint at this stage and prima facie, I am of the view that since the complaint is bereft of making any allegations of direct and overt act against the present petitioner and the present petitioner since is also being designated as a Government Servant, his presence during the course of trial can be ensured. As such, imposing reasonable restrictions, he may be enlarged on the relief of anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following;
O R D E R The petition is allowed.
It is ordered that in the event of arrest of the present petitioner by the respondent – K.M. Doddi Police Station, in Crime No.85/2019, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 417, 376, 323, 506 R/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, he shall be enlarged on the relief of anticipatory bail, subject to the conditions that;
(i) He shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the enlarging authority.
(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every 1st and 3rd Thursday of the month between 9.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m., and mark his attendance till the investigation is completed and final report is filed.
(iii) He shall not hamper and tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
(iv) He shall voluntarily surrender before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court within three weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE BMV*