IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5783/2018 BETWEEN:
Smt.Manjulamma @ Lakshmamma, Aged about 47 years, W/o Vasu, No.87, 8th Cross, 14th Main, Indira Colony, Vijayanagar 2nd Stage, Bangalore North, Bangalore-560040. ...Petitioner (By Sri G.S.Naveen Kumar, Adv. for Sri S.B.Mukkannappa, Advocate) AND:
State by Byatarayanapura PS, Byatarayanapura, Mysore Road, Bangalore-560026 Rep. By SPP High Court Building, Bangalore. ... Respondent (By Smt. Namitha Mahesh. B.G., HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.216/2018 of Byatarayanapura Police Station, Bangalore City for the offence P/U/S 376D, 354C, 380, 323, 506, 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release her on anticipatory bail in Crime No.216/2018 of Byatarayanapura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376D, 354C, 380, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant was staying in PG Centre since two years as paying guest. Petitioner-accused No.2 was working as a Manager. It is further stated that petitioner/accused No.2, used to visit the room of the complainant and when she visited the room, she has stolen some golden articles. It is further alleged that the complainant requested to return the said golden articles but petitioner/accused No.2 used to postpone the same and thereafter, she started insisted the victim to cooperate with one Kumara and Prakash during night time. It is further alleged that on 18.03.2018 at about 11.30 p.m., the victim was there in the room accused No.2 came along with them and knocked the door and she opened the door, she along with two persons entered by closing her face with clothes, she lost her conscious. When she gained her consciousness at about 8.00 a.m. in the morning, she was undressed and one Karthik was also sleeping by her side. At that time, Karthik told her not to disclose the said fact to anybody, if she say, the said sexual act which has been recorded and the same will be revealed to the general public. On the basis of the complaint, the case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a delay of eight months in lodging the complaint. He further submitted that the statement of the owner has been recorded and in the statement of the PG owner, she has specifically stated that petitioner/accused No.2 is working as a Manager. The victim has not paid any rent and the charges for having taken the food and she has been instructed to collect the said amount or she has to vacate the said PG. In that light, there was some altercations between accused No.2 and the victim. He further submitted that in order to overcome the said fact, the false complaint has been registered. He further submitted that there are no serious over tact all the other overt acts are as against the remaining accused persons. She is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that accused No.2 is an employee and she used to steal the gold articles. In order to return the same, she was insisting the victim to cooperate with the remaining two accused. She also submitted that on 25.05.2018 the petitioner has assaulted with the ripper piece and caused injuries. She also further submitted the petitioner is perpetrator of crime in its entirety and without her all the remaining incident ought not to have taken place. She also further submitted that the petitioner/accused is absconded. If she is released, she may abscond and she may not be available for the investigation. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
7. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
8. On close reading of the said contents of the complaint and other materials the alleged incident has taken place on 18.03.2018 and the complaint has been registered on 26.5.2018. There is a delay in lodging the complaint. Even as per the records, there are serious allegations made against the petitioner/accused. The provisions of Section 376(D) of IPC is not attracted in so far as, the petitioner/accused is concerned the remaining Sections, they are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a quarrel for having asked her to vacate the PG room and in that light, a false complaint has been registered. The said submission is also substantiated by the statement of owner of the PG Centre. Under the said facts and circumstance, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the accused petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
9. In that light, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.216/2018 of Byatarayanapura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376(D), 354(C), 380, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions.
1. Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. He shall surrender before the Investigation Agency within 15 days from today.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days till the chargesheet is filed.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
SD/- JUDGE rv