STATE Vs. MANJUNATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition filed by the State under Section 439 (2) of the Cr. P. C. , anticipatory bail granted to the respondent/accused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chickmagalur in Cri, Mis. No. 52 of 2003 by order dated 10-3-2003 is sought to be cancelled.

(2.) A case of rape was registered against the respondent on the basis of a complaint made by a young girl at 2. 30 p. m. on 3-2-2003. It was alleged by her in the complaint that at about 8 p. m. , the previous day, when she was going to the house of Nagarajagowda for the purpose of areca work, the accused/respondent, came from her backside suddenly, embraced her and committed rape on her. It was further stated by her that when she shouted, the accused ran away. She told about the incident to a friend of hers at the place of work, but since her mother was not at home, she could not tell her about the incident. The next day morning, she told about the incident to her elder brother, who took her to Balehonnur Police Station, where she lodged a complaint. On the basis of the same, a case was registered against the present respondent for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3 (1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) Act, 1989. Apprehending arrest, the respondent filed Cri. Mis. No. 52 of 2003 praying for grant of anticipatory bail. The learned additional Sessions Judge, Chickmagalur, while considering the petition for bail observed that during the course of the alleged rape, the complainant did not shout for help, but shouted only after the alleged rape, which fact indicated possible consent of the complainant for the act of the accused. On the basis of that presumption, he passed an order on 10-3-2003, granting anticipatory bail. In fiirtherance of the same, the petitioner surrendered before the police on 13-3-2003. He was arrested and the underwear allegedly worn by him on the date of the alleged incident was seized and thereafter he was released on bail. It is further stated that after the case was committed to the Sessions, he has been granted regular bail. This petition has been filed by the State for cancellation of bail on the ground that considering the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the case, anticipatory bail ought not to have been granted to the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned High Court Government Pleader argues that the presence of the accused for the investigation in such a serious offence was necessary and that grant of anticipatory bail drawing a premature conelusion that in all probability, the alleged act was with the consent of the complainant was unwarranted. He therefore requests that the bail granted may be cancelled.