SHAMSHUDDIN @ MUTHU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is accused No.1 in S.C.No.78/2013 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Kodagu, Madikeri, registered for the offence punishable under Section 376 r/w. 34 of IPC is before this Court praying for releasing him on bail.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution, this petitioner in the month of September, 2011 got acquainted with CW.1 by contacting on her mobile and thereafter promising her to get her a house, secured her on the night of 30th September 2011 to the coffee estate of one Manavattira Iyappa situated at Chonakere village coming within the jurisdiction of Napoklu police station and there in a coolie line house subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse after threatening her with dire consequences and continued the act of rape on her during the Dasara vacation of the year 2011 and further during the month of December, 2011 A.2 also committed rape on hear while she was working in the coffee estate and staying in the coolie line house belonging to Manavattira Iyappa and they had also threatened her with dire consequences saying that she and her children would be burned if she were to take steps to file any complaint.

(3.) PER contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition filed by the petitioner contended that the statement of CW.1 coupled with the other material on record would clearly go to show that this petitioner has committed rape on CW.1 against her wish by threatening her with dire consequences. CW.1 having been subjected to sexual intercourse is fortified from the medical report on record. Therefore, he contends that though there is a delay in filing the complaint by CW.1, having regard to the act alleged against the petitioner, there is no reason to discard her statement and since a prima facie case for the offence under Section 376 of IPC is made out, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.