Santosh and Others vs The State of Karnataka

G. Narendra, J.

The petitioners are before this Court being aggrieved by their detention injudicial custody since 21.07.2014. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 3 and 2.

The de facto complainant is the victim by name Nagarathna Adiveppa Rachannavar @ Asha Aruna Halkarnikar, who has submitted a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Belgaum on 15.05.2014.

The complainant alleges that accused No. 1, who is also a resident of the same village was stalking and harassing her and constantly made attempts to prevail upon her to fall in love with him and have an affair with him and every time he would threaten her stating that if she does not yield to his demand and love him he would murder her father and two sisters and unable to bear this harassment she revealed the same to her family members, who then decided to get her married and her marriage was performed with one Sri Arun Halkarnikar, a resident of Bijagarni village, Belgaum district on 30.05.2013. She further narrates that after the marriage she was living peacefully with her husband and his family and that as per tradition she returned to her matrimonial home in the month of Ashada for a brief stay of 15 days. She further states that not willing to while away her time by idling, she decided to learn tailoring and towards this end she used to attend classes in K.E.B. quarters in Nirmal Nagar. She states that the accused No. 1 upon coming to know about this on 15.07.2013 intercepted her at about 1.00 p.m. in the afternoon along with his friends and threatened her to accompany him in his three wheeler motor vehicle and took her to a pre-arranged house in Honaga village and kept her in confinement there for three days and committed sexual assault/rape upon her on all the three days and upon coming to know that her father had registered a missing complaint with the jurisdictional police he threatened her to appear before the police and stated that she had gone to her friends house and in the event she does not do as directed by him he is said to have repeated his threat to finish off her father and sister. The victim, out of fear is said to have misrepresented to the police as per the diktat of accused No. 1 and thereafter she was allowed to go to her parental house. It is alleged that again in August 2013 one day at about 12 noon when she was at her house the accused No. 1 is said to have trespassed into the house and threatened her to accompany him and is further alleged to have stated that her father was in the custody of his associates and if she does not accompany him immediately, he would be finished.

The victim apprehending for the life of her father, accompanied the accused No. 1 as per his demand, who then took her to a park in Belgaum, where he was joined by accused Nos. 2 and 3. It is further alleged that the accused No. 1 including accused Nos. 2 and 3 are said to have threatened her and told her to divorce her husband and when she protested they are said to have assaulted her. Further the accused No. 1 is reported to have once again threatened her telling her that he will not leave her at any cost and that she must marry him, otherwise he is said to have threatened to finish off her sisters. Thereafter, he is alleged to have taken her to a house in Karadigudda and thereafter she was sent to her residents house. Thereafter she alleges that for six months she was living peacefully with her husband.

The present case arises out of the following allegation where she states that on March 11th she along with her husband were proceeding to her matrimonial house to attend a festival and she states that her husband proposed to buy certain sweets and savories and he asked her to wait near St. Xavier High School and he went to the shop when suddenly the friends of accused No. 1, Ramesh and Veeresh came from behind smothered her and covered her nose and mouth with a cloth resulting in her falling unconscious and thereafter she was taken to a house and made to stay along with one Savitha, who is alleged to be the lover of Veeresh. It is alleged that the said Veeresh is said to have informed her that the accused No. 1 has instructed them to keep her in custody till he comes and that if she tries to escape he is said to have threatened to kill her and she was detained there for three days and during the said detention said Veeresh is said to have forcibly removed her mangalsutra and ear rings on 30.03.2014. She was kept in the room till 30.03.2014 at Anagola and she was being guarded by said Veeresh and Ramesh. In interregnum, on coming to know that the husband of the victim had lodged a complaint with the Khade Bazar police station. They informed the accused No. 1 and as per his direction they shifted her from Anagola to a Vaibhav Nagar in Belgaum, where she was kept with a lady aged about 50 years, who had a son by name Santosh, who was a car driver and was a friend of said Veeresh. She alleged that she was kept in the said place for five days and thereafter on 05.04.2014 the accused No. 1 returned from his posting and as no one used to stay in the house in the day time he took advantage of it and forcibly committed rape upon her. After that once it became known to accused No. 1 that the police had intensified the search. He made the victim call the police from her mobile and to tell that she has not been kidnapped and that she has to come to her friend''s house. Thereafter again he threatened her to falsely depose before police and accordingly she has stated so before the Khade Bazar Police on 07.04.2014. But, after stating so, she is alleged to have refused to go either to her parents house or to her husband''s house and is said to have requested the police to house her in any home, and accordingly, the police had sent her to the address, where she was residing in Shree Sharada Matha Swadhara Kendra. Thereafter her parents and others came and met her and spoke to her and helped her to come out of the severe depression. Thereafter taking up her courage she has lodged the present complaint, whereby she has stated that accused No. 1 as on three occasions kidnapped her and forcibly raped her.

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and respondent.

The petitioner''s counsel would submit that the petitioner is innocent and that the charge sheet has already been filed. He would submit that the version of the victim has to be disbelieved as she has been prevaricating and that she herself had deposed before the police that she had been to her friends house and she had not uttered a whisper about any sexual assault and the victim is a unreliable witness. He would submit that the story trotted out about she having been kidnapped from Khade Bazar area is totally false. He would further submit that even as per the complaint the accused has not committed any sexual assault and that he is aged only 24 years and that he is legitimately eking out his livelihood.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that this is a successive bail petition and there are no changed circumstances. He would submit that it is true that this accused has not committed the sexual assault, but have been instrumental in the main accused performing the crime. He would submit that the accused No. 1 is a compulsive rapist and he has been continuously exploiting the victim. It is submitted that the investigations have prima facie demonstrated the truthfulness of the victim''s statement. He would state that the trial has commenced, and hence, it would be inappropriate to elaborate on the merits as it could jeopardize the case of the prosecution. He would submit that but for the external help and instigation by the other accused, probably the accused No. 1, might not have gathered courage to indulge in such offences and that too so often. He would submit that the other accused have been a source of strength to the accused No. 1 to carry on his illegal activities, and hence, he would pray that the petition be rejected.

The case in a nutshell is that the accused No. 1 appears to be a compulsive offender and he has been brazenly committing the heinous crime of rape with scant regard and respect for law or Law Enforcement Agencies. It appears that the accused No. 1 has been taking the help of other accused and the other accused persons have been actively and knowingly assisting him in committing the heinous crime. The submission by respondent counsel that any observation on merits could seriously affect the trial and that too involving such a sensitive case, where the victim as laid bare her sufferings at the hands of the accused and the chances of the probability of conviction being high, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, the petitions are dismissed as being devoid of merits.