w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Sunil @ Sunil Ashok Gadivaddar v/s State of Karnataka, Rep. by SPP, Bengaluru


    Criminal Petition No. 2589 of 2020

    Decided On, 25 June 2020

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

    For the Petitioner: N. Anantha Naik, Advocate. [Through Video Conference]. For the Respondent: R.D. Renukaradhya, HCGP.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed Under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.421/2019 of Ramamurthy Nagar P.S., Bengaluru City for the offence p/u/s 376, 420, 506 of IPC.)

1. One Almas Banu, daughter of Gaffar filed a complaint with Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station stating inter alia that complainant and petitioner were working together in Big Bazaar. Their friendship turned into a love affair. As petitioner had relationship with some other lady, the complainant sought to distance herself from the petitioner. Complainant was called to petitioner's place on 18th May 2019 with a promise to delete the photographs taken by accused. She went to his place and the accused deleted all photographs. He assured that he would not trouble her in future and offered her sweets. After consuming the sweet, she lost her consciousness and petitioner raped her and video graphed the same. Thereafter, he has been blackmailing her. Accordingly, FIR No.421/2019 has been registered in Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station.

2. Shri. N.Anantha Naik, learned Advocate for petitioner submitted that petitioner and the complainant were good friends and they fell in love with each other. However, since differences arose between them, a false complaint has been registered by the complainant. He further submitted that complaint has been registered at 16.45 hours on 27.09.2019. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed.

3. He further submitted that charge sheet papers disclose that Panchanama was conducted between 4.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. on 27.09.2019, the day on which complaint has been registered. Therefore, investigation has begun before the registration of complaint, which is a serious legal infirmity. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing this petition.

4. Shri. R.D.Renukaradhya, learned HCGP for State argued opposing the petition.

5. I have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.

6. Complaint discloses that both complainant and petitioner were working in Big Bazaar and they had a love affair. Shri. Anantha Naik, is right in his submission that complaint has been registered at 16.45 hours on 27.09.2019, where as, Panchanama has been conducted between 4.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. on the same day prior to registration of complaint. This leads to an inference that investigation has begun before registration of complaint. Both complainant and accused are majors and they were working together. In the circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, it is fit case to grant bail.

7. Therefore, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that:

(i) Petitioner shall be released on bail upon his executing self bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence;

(iii) Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witness or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer; (iv) Petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities; and (v) If the petitioner violates any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. Petition allowed. No costs.
O R