SANJAY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376, 363, 354, 509, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(iii)(ix) & 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered in the respondent Police Station Crime No. 299/2015.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case as per the averments in the petition are that the complainant lodged a complaint on 16.09.2015 at 8.15 p.m. before the Kakati Police Station alleging that she was studying in Kittur Rani Channamma Kannada Convent School, Kakati, in 7th standard during 2005 -06, at that time, the petitioner was working as assistant teacher in the said school. It is further alleged that at that time an educational trip was arranged and the petitioner also went to the said trip. It is further alleged that when the complainant had gone to take bath at that time, the petitioner had taken the video of the complainant and shown it to the complainant and blackmailed saying that, if the complainant did not support him then the petitioner will upload the said video in the internet. It is further alleged that on 08.09.2015, the complainant was kidnapped by the petitioner and she was sexually harassed till 12.09.2015 and also that the petitioner threatened the complainant that if she disclosed the said fact to anybody, he will not leave her alive and also the petitioner abused the complainant by taking her caste. On the basis of the said complaint, the respondent -police have registered the case in Crime No. 299/2015 for the alleged offences.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner, during the course of the arguments, submitted that the complaint lodged by the complainant is a detailed complaint of 11 pages. He submitted that the contents of the complaint goes to show that petitioner started sexually harassing the complainant from the year 2005 -06 itself He submitted that the materials goes to show that the complainant as on today is aged 24 years and in the year 2011 the complainant and the present petitioner got married in the Registrar's Office which is evidenced by the document dated 16th May 2011. It is also his submission that the complainant has been shown as a nominee of the accused herein and in this regard he drew the attention of this Court to page 56 of the petition, the copy of HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company with regard to the schedule of premium and the nomination schedule wherein the name of the life insured is shown as Sanjay R. Shivappanavar i.e., the present petitioner herein at Sl. No. 1 and at Sl. No. 2 the name of Mrs. Shivaleela S. Shivappanavar who is the complainant herein. In the nomination schedule of the said document, the name of the complainant is mentioned. It is also his further submission that health privilege cards of the accused as well as the complainant are produced in this case. Hence, it is his contention that both the complainant and the accused got married since 2011 itself and they are living as husband and wife, but now at the instigation of the parents and also other persons, the complainant has filed the complaint making false allegations against the present petitioner. Learned counsel further made submission that if at all alleged sexual harassment started in the year 2005 itself, all along for a period of 10 years i.e., up to 2015, the complainant kept mum and now she has come up with the present complaint and hence learned counsel submitted that the time of the alleged harassment and the date of filing the present complaint i.e., after a lapse of 10 years may also be taken while appreciating the allegations of the complaint in this case. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat & Anr. reported in : 2015 AIAR (Criminal) 915. He submitted that the present petitioner is also serving as a teacher. He has undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court and is ready to co -operate with the investigating officer and hence the petition be allowed and the petitioner may be granted with bail.