LAWS(KAR)-2023-6-473

K. MADESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On June 01, 2023
K. Madesh Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in a case registered in Crime No.101/2023 of Subramanyapura Police Station, for offences punishable under Ss. 354(A), 506, 509, 504 and 353 of IPC.

(2.) It is alleged in the complaint lodged by the complainant working as Junior Engineer, S-18 sub division, O and M unit-2, BESCOM, chikkalasandra that on 6/4/2023 at 9.00 p.m. she reported for duty as per the orders of her higher Officer and while she was on duty, public appeared and reported to her that there is some problem in their electricity connection. At that time the accused with an intention to deter her from discharging her official duty started to record from his mobile phone, keeping the said phone close to the face of the complainant. When the complainant requested him to stop recoding the video, he started shouting at her and threatened her showing signal by hand. When a public and employees of BESCOM tried to rescue the complainant from the petitioner, he stopped recording and then went away shouting at the complainant and threatening her with dire consequences.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be innocent. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner would contend that the entire allegations are false and it is a concocted story. He would contend that the complainant by misusing her power has lodged a fictitious complaint against the petitioner, even though no such incident has taken place as alleged. He contends that the public had complained about fluctuations in power phase in the electric meter and they had requested the BESCOM officials to rectify the same, but the complainant and other staff of the BESCOM have turned deaf ears and when the public insisted to take action against the complainant, the present complaint was lodged against the petitioner creating a concocted story. He submits that the respondent police have almost completed the investigation and the presence of the petitioner is not at all required and therefore seeks to allow the petition.