Pandurangappa B.P. vs The State of Karnataka

Budihal R.B., J.—This is the petition filed by the petitioner/accused u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences punishable u/s 354(A), 504, 506 of IPC and u/s 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered in respondent-police station in Crime No. 124/2013.

Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the averments made in the complaint are that on the basis of written complaint lodged by Rekha, D/o Lakshmanappa, the respondent-police have registered N.C.R. No. 152/2013 on 11.11.2013 against the petitioner. Subsequently, again based on a written complaint lodged on 11.11.2013, the respondent-police registered a case in Crime No. 124/2013 for the alleged offences and it is alleged in the complaint that complainant Rekha is studying Arts in Government P.U. College at Pattanayakanahalli Village, Sira Taluk. That on 07.11.2013 at about 10.00 a.m. when the complainant, was in the class room with her friends Poornima and Sunitha, a girl by name Amrutha-II year PUC student came there and told that Principal is calling them to his office. Accordingly, the complainant went to the office room along with her friend Poornima. On seeing them, the petitioner has asked the complainant as to why they are doing galata in the class room, when the complainant denied, the petitioner has abused the girls using filthy language. Further the petitioner has told that she will be sent out of college by issuing T.C. at that time, the complainant was subjected to sexual harassment in the presence of another girl by name Poornima. In order to escape from him, the victim came out of the office room. On the basis of the complaint case has been registered for the alleged offences against the petitioner.

Heard the arguments of the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned H.C.G.P. for the respondent-State.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that regarding the alleged incident dated 07.11.2013, firstly, the complaint was made on 11.11.2013 and it was made as N.C.R. No. 152/2013, again on the same day i.e., on 11.11.2013 the complainant made another compliant in respect of the same incident said to have been taken place on 07.11.2013. Hence, the learned senior counsel made the submission that it goes to show that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and also made the submission that even on 11.11.2013 again there is one more complaint made making the improvement of the allegations against the petitioner/Principal of the college. Hence, he submitted that when the matter has already been considered by the police and N.C.R. report was also submitted stating that there is no case at all, subsequently, with an intention to falsely implicate the petitioner, the complaint has been made. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that he being the Principal of the college he has to face the situation this type of false allegations. Now he is having apprehension of his arrest at the hands of the respondent-police and learned senior counsel submitted that by imposing any reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to bail.

As against this, the learned H.C.G.P., during the course of his arguments submitted that looking to the statement of victim girl Rekha it goes to show that there was sexual harassment by the Principal against her. Hence, he made the submission that the matter is still under investigation, Investigating Officer has to collect some more material, therefore, in view of such serious allegations, at this stage it is not a case to grant anticipatory bail.

I have perused the averments made in the petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record and also the order passed by the lower Court on the bail application. As it is submitted in respect of the incident dated 07.11.2013, earlier complaint was made and the learned senior counsel has produced the document dated 11.11.2013 wherein the police has issued the acknowledgment making it as N.C.R. No. 152/2013. So this prima-facie goes to show that there was no case at all to be taken cognizance of. But by looking to the subsequent complaint it was also on the same date i.e., on 11.11.2013, wherein it is mentioned that when the complainant and her friend Poornima were called to the chamber of the Principal, he has patted the back as well as touched the chest and in the subsequent complaint dated 11.11.2013, it is also mentioned that he has also touched the private part. This goes to show that by making the petition one after the other the complainant go on improving the allegations against the present petitioner. When it is the case of the prosecution that when complainant was called to the chamber of the Principal she has been to the chamber of the Principal along with her friend Poornima. Though the learned H.C.G.P. referred to the statement of some of the students said to have been 1 recorded by the Investigating. Officer during investigation, but the statement of Poornima was not at all recorded by the Investigating Officer until now. Looking to the statements of students whose statements were recorded, have stated that they don''t know what has happened and the Principal has not at all behaved in the said manner. So also the material placed by the prosecution itself prima-facie goes to show that the subsequent complaints are after thought and motivated. Therefore, looking to the materials on record I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of present petitioner, by imposing the reasonable conditions. Regarding his apprehension of arrest at the hands of the respondent-police, the petitioner has made out a case. Accordingly, petition is allowed., The respondent-Police is directed to enlarge the present petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable u/s 354(A), 504, 506 of IPC and u/s 8 of the P.O.S.C.O. Act, registered in respondent - police station Crime No. 124/2013, subject to the following conditions:

i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- and has to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation, whenever called upon to do so.

iv. The petitioner has to appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of copy of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.