NINGAPPA YALLAVVA GUDENNAVAR @ MADDAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader.

(2.) The petitioner is the sole accused in Cr.No.70/2016 registered by the respondent police station for the offence punishable under Sections 506, 376 and 417 IPC. The allegation in a nutshell is that the petitioner was introduced to the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant after coming to know that the petitioner belongs to the same caste, indulged with him and as a consequence of this relationship, on 15.10.2015, the petitioner - accused took the complainant to a hut and on the promise of marrying her is said to have indulged in a sexual intercourse. Thereafter, he started avoiding the complainant and also declined to marry her. Aggrieved by the same, the complainant approached the jurisdictional police and registered a complaint on 12.03.2016 and the petitioner came to be arrested and remanded to the judicial custody on 15.03.2016.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the complainant is a major and even if the allegation of sexual intercourse is considered to be true, it is a consensual act between the two adults and prima facie, charging the petitioner under Section 376 of IPC is baseless. He also drew the attention of this Court to the enormous delay, which even as per the complaint, the incident is said to have occurred on 15.10.2015 and the complaint is registered after more than 5 months of the incident. He submits that any prudent person would have acted immediately and would have set the law into motion if the cruel act is against her desire or wish.