IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5615/2017 BETWEEN:
Mr Srinivas Murthy @ Punith S/o Venugopal Aged about 24 years R/at No.06, VI Main VII Cross, Doddagollarahatti Nagadevenahalli Kengeri Upanagara Bangalore-560 060. .. PETITIONER (By Sri Manjunath K V, Adv.) AND:
State of Karnataka by Kengeri Police Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Courts Complex Bangalore-560 001. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.135/2017 of Kengeri P.S., Bangalore for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 376 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following :
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.135/2017.
2. Brief facts of the case of prosecution are that the accused Srinivas Murthy was the class mate of the complainant during her school days. The accused loved and married the sister of the complainant. It is also alleged in the complaint that the complainant married to some other person, who was medically unfit for the consummation of the marriage. This fact was within the knowledge of the petitioner. Taking undue advantage of the same, the petitioner phoned to the complainant and called to his house and committed forcible sexual intercourse on her somewhere in the month of November 2016. One day, when she was alone in her house, the accused entered into her house and committed the sexual intercourse on her and when she told him that she would lodge police complaint, the accused threatened to murder her sister Mamatha and the husband of the complainant and subsequently also, the accused made phone call inviting her for sexual intercourse. During January, 2017, accused threatened her that he has recorded the obscene photos and would upload them to her husband and called to his house and committed sexual intercourse. He threatened to murder her sister, in case she informs anybody and as such, she did not inform anybody nor chosen to lodge any complaint. Even this day, the accused is making phone calls and threatening to show the photos in case she refuses to have sex with him as and when he desires to have sex and accordingly, she made a complaint. On the basis of the same, case came to be registered.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the entire charge sheet materials on record.
5. Looking to the complaint averments and as it is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner, the alleged incident of rape has taken place in the month of November 2016 and therefore, there is delay of more than seven months in lodging the complaint. It is also the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner that even with regard to the second alleged incident of rape, it is said that it is taken place in the month of January 2017. Even then, the complaint was not filed immediately. But it was filed in the month of April i.e, after the lapse of three months of the incident. Hence, it is his contention that there is no prima facie case as against the petitioner. However, it is contended by learned HCGP that looking to the statement of the victim girl, wherein, it is stated that the accused person was threatening her that, in case, she discloses the fact of sexual intercourse before anybody, he is going to show the photographs to the others. Hence, because of such threat, the complaint was not given immediately. But looking to the delay caused in the said case, the said threat may be either 15 days or at the most one month. But continuously for six months, the victim girl kept mum and no complaint was filed before anybody. Even at the second time of intercourse also, no complaint was filed immediately.
6. The petitioner has contended that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He has undertaken that he is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Investigation of the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner- accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC registered in respondent – police station Crime No.135/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE Cs/-