IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1742/2019 BETWEEN:
MR. RAVIKUMAR S/O SEENAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE TOOBUGERE HOBLI BENGLURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562 123.
(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M.R., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BENGALURU POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001.
(BY SRI. S.RACHAIAH., HCGP) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:26.02.2019, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTICT IN S.C.NO.279/2014 AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 91(1) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Sri.Balakrishna M.R., learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State.
2. Petitioner who is facing prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 376, 420 and 506 IPC registered by Bagalur Police Station, which proceedings is pending on the file of Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore, is before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
3. During the course of trial petitioner filed an application under Section 91(1) of Cr.P.C. seeking for a direction to the Deputy Director-UADAI, Regional Office, Khanija Bhavan, No.49, 3rd Floor, South Wing, Race Course Road, Bangalore, to produce the following documents:
(i) Voter’s Identity Card (ii) Permanent Account Number Card (iii) Documents submitted by Smt. K.S. Veena (P.W.6) at the time of initial enrollment or issuance of Aadhar Card No.675170157358 4. Said application came to be resisted by the prosecutor before learned trial Judge. Same has received the attention of trial Court and by the impugned order trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that accused had admitted his relationship with P.W.6; DNA report of the child of P.W.6 indicated that petitioner had fathered the child;
P.W.6 has been extensively cross examined and he has admitted his physical relationship with victim P.W.6 in his examination-in-chief itself. Hence, for setting aside said order and to allow the application this petition is filed.
5. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records it would disclose that defence which has been set up by the petitioner-accused is that victim P.W.6 was in the habit of having multiple physical relationship and factually she had consensual sex with accused and as such it did not attract ingredients of Section 376 of IPC. It is also the defence of accused that P.W.6 was having multiple relationship and accused is not the father of the child. Infact accused has been extensively cross examined P.W.6 - victim lady on this issue.
6. This Court has also perused the cross- examination of P.W.6 and it would disclose that in the cross-examination of P.W.6 conducted on 23.06.2018 when confronted with suggestion at the time of submitting her application for issuance of Aadhar Card, she had furnished the address as “W/o. Ganesh G, No.46, Sonnenahalli, Maruthinagar, Bangalore South, Bangalore, Karnataka-560056” which has been denied. She has also denied about she having known said Ganesh G and she has further denied that she was live- in-relationship with the said Ganesh G. However, copy of the Aadhar Card of P.W.6 which came to be produced by accused and confronted in cross-examination of P.W.6 depictes her address in the said card as “W/o.
Ganesh G” with aforestated address. In this factual scenario learned trial Judge had directed P.W.6 to produce the original Aadhar Card and accordingly she has tendered the same before trial Court. It is thereafter on 10.08.2018 counsel for accused has cross-examined P.W.6 and suggested to her that address now depicted in the Aadhar Card, which has been produced, has been got changed by P.W.6. She has stated that her earlier Aadhar Card had been lost and as such she obtained new Aadhar Card. She has also admitted in her cross-examination dated 23.06.2018 that on 03.05.2018 she obtained new Aadhar Card after seeking change of address. Her admission reads:
“03-05-2018gÀAzÀÄ £Á£ÀÄ ºÉƸÀzÁV DzsÁgï PÁqïð£À £À£Àß «¼Á¸ÀªÀ£ÀÄß wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ªÀiÁr ºÉƸÀzÁV ¥ÀqÉ¢zÉÝÃ£É J£ÀÄߪÀÅzÀÄ ¸Àj.”
7. This would clearly indicate that subsequent to accused producing Aadhar Card of the victim-P.W.6, she has got the address changed and as such Sri.Balakrishna, learned counsel is justified in contending that in order to establish the defence of accused documents which were produced by the victim-
P.W.6 at the time of submitting her application initially i.e., for the first time in issuing Aadhar Card would have a bearing on his defence. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that prayer sought for in the application deserves to be granted and impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Order dated 26.02.2019 passed by VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore, is hereby set aside and application filed under Section 91(1) of Cr.P.C.
is allowed and documents sought for in the application is ordered to be summoned before learned trial Judge and who on receipt of same shall proceed with the proceedings accordingly.
In view of petition having been allowed, I.A.No.1/2019 for stay does not survive for consideration and it is rejected.
SD/- JUDGE DR