IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF APRIL 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1946/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. AMITH KUMAR, S/O SRI. ARUN KUMAR K AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NISHARGA, THOIPAKALL, 2ND BLOCK, VAMANJOOR, MANGALORE-575028.
(BY SMT. SANDHYA.U.PRABHU, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MULKIPOLICE STATION.
(BY SRI. B.J.ESHWARAPPA, GP.) …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.192/2016 OF MULKI POLICE STATION, D.K., WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 417, 376, 506 AND 306 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
2. The respondent-police have registered a FIR against the petitioner and his parents in respect of the offence punishable under sections 417, 376, 506, 306 r/w section 34 of IPC in their Cr.No.192/16.
3. The allegation of the prosecution is, the complainant came in contact with the petitioner in the work place in the year 2013. Under the pretext of attending a Birthday party in a hotel, he took her to a room in the lodge, took her nude photo and committed rape on her. He threatened to publish her nude photos in her work place. On the assurance of his family members to arrange their marriage, she stayed with him at Mangaluru in a room. During that time, the petitioner had sexual intercourse with her. During 2015 he went to Abudabi. After some time, he returned and has taken Rs.1 lakh from her, but later refused to marry her. The complainant also went to Abudabi during March 2016. During the said period, he had agreed to marry her. But however later sent message resenting his consent to marry etc., 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the I.O and co-operate with the investigation. Further he apprehends arrest on his return to India.
5. On the showing of the complaint itself, it was a going on relation for about 2 to 3 years. Having regard to the nature of allegation, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in Cr.No.192/2016 for a period of three weeks. Within the above period, he shall surrender before the concerned Court and move for regular bail. Till disposal of his bail petition, this order will be in force. In the event of his arrest by the respondent-I.O. in respect of the above case, he shall be released on bail on executing self bond for Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum.
Dvr:
Sd/- JUDGE