SWAPNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying this Court to set aside the order dated 08.10.2020 in Crl.Misc.No.5172/2020 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, D.K., and direct respondent No.1-Police to arrest respondent No.2 and commit him to the custody.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant, who is the sister-in-law of the accused had given the statement in the hospital that, when the complainant and her daughter are in the house, this petitioner came in connection with repayment of loan borrowed by her deceased husband from PCARD Bank, Kadaba. In this regard, he used to come to the house of the complainant and disturb her and her daughter and he used to knock the door of the house. This petitioner trespassed into the house of the complainant; by removing his knicker, he misbehaved and sexually harassed her in the grudge of non-payment of the loan installment and in connection with the cutting of sprinkler pipe of the garden of the accused. On 23.01.2020 at about 4:00 p.m, when the complainant was in her house with her two years old daughter-Sameeksha, abused the complainant in a filthy language and asked her to sell her children and follow him and while complainant was recording the video, he threw the golden touch formic acid through the window to the face and chest of complainant. As a result, the complainant and her daughter suffered burn injuries. Based on this complaint, a case has been registered in Crime No.6/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 354A, 509, 504, 506, 448, 307 and 326A of IPC. Respondent No.2 has filed the bail petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, and the learned District Judge granted bail in favour of respondent No.2 vide order 8.10.2020. Hence, the present petition is filed for cancellation of bail.

(3.) The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-complainant is that the learned District Judge while exercising the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, failed to take note of the gravity of the offences and also it is a case of throwing the acid and as a result the complainant sustained the burn injuries and the daughter also sustained the injuries. The District Judge while exercising the discretion also not assigned the reason only stating that he is the resident of Kodimbala and there is no chances of fleeing away from justice and fleeing away from justice is also very less. It is also observed in the order that prior to the institution of the present case, the relationship was strained between the parties. The very reasoning given by the Court is erroneous.