- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100313 OF 2025 [438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS)] BETWEEN: ASHOK S/O. OMALAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. DEVALAPUR, TQ. NIDAGUNDI, DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586213. … PETITIONER (BY SRI A.M.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH VIDYAGIRI POLICE STATION DHARWAD, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD. 2. RAJESHWARI D/O. SANGAMESH KAJAGAR, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC. KMF EMPLOYEE, R/O. NIDAGUNDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA, NOW RESIDING AT VIDHYARTHINILAY LADIES P.G NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD 580025. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI R.H.ANGADI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF BNSS, 2023 (UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C.) SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON AN ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN VIDYAGIRI P.S. DHARWAD, CRIME NO.224/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376, 384, 354, 417, 323, 504, 506, 149 OF IPC 1860, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 3RD ADDL. CJ AND CJM COURT, DHARWAD. MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.02.24 14:25:33 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’ for short) for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime no.224/2024 by Vidyagiri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376, 384, 354, 417, 323, 504, 506 and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short) by accused no.1 (petitioner). 2. Sri AM Malipatil, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was an 41 years old agriculturist, law abiding citizen and having reputation in society. He apprehended arrest based on frivolous complaint filed by complainant/victim on 09.12.2024 stating that she was originally from Nidagundi of Vijayapur District and that petitioner, a resident of Devalapur in Bijapur District had acquainted himself with her in year 2016-17 as a Film Director. That during December, 2017, he had under threat to her life, disrobed her and forcibly raped her in his office above Siddasiri - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 Souhardha Bank at Nidagundi and threaten her by stating that he had videographed incident. By blackmailing her in this manner, he had raped her several times. It was further alleged despite being married, he had entered into make believe marriage with her on 02.12.2021 at Bengaluru, which was not valid in law and had continued sexual relationship with her. After she found about his earlier marriage and she had resiled to be by herself, on 10.10.2024 petitioner’s sister and his brother’s wife had come to Navanagar, where she was residing and not only insisted her to be with him after resigning from her job, but also threatened her. 3. Thereafter, petitioner began blackmailing her threatening to post her edited/morphed photographs on social media and also share her rape video with everyone. It was alleged that he had also blackmailed her into paying him more than Rs.4,75,000/- through GooglePay, cash etc. And during February, 2024, he had blackmailed her to come to Crown Inn Hotel at Sattur, where he once again raped her. Thereafter, he was following her and threatening to kill her in same manner as two girls murdered in Hubballi and also threatening to lodge cases against her and her family members under provisions of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. And on 11.11.2024 he had come to her Office in KMF and abused her in filthy language and alleged that she was in illicit relationship with someone else. He had also assaulted her physically and threatened to obtain information about her under RTI Act and post same along with her obscene photographs on social media and destroy her social image. And by this method he had instilled fear for her life if she did not sleep with him whenever he wants and pay him money. 4. It was further alleged that at 3:24 p.m., on 03.12.2024, petitioner along with Anil Rathod, Dariyappa Hosamani, Ashok Hebbal, Sanganna Dambal and two – three others had come near ladies PG, where she was residing and began roaming around uttering life threats, whenever she came outside and insisting on her continuing illicit relationship with him and also continue paying him money. On above allegations, she sought action against petitioner. Based on same, Crime no.224/2024 was registered by Vidyagiri Police Station for above mentioned offences. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 5. It was submitted, as per complaint incident took place in year 2017. However, complaint was filed only on 09.12.2024, delay of more than 7 years. It was submitted, instead of filing complaint immediately after incident, filing it after enormous delay was with intention to harass petitioner. It was submitted, prolonged period of sexual relationship indicated her consent. It was submitted, failure to mention particulars of money transferred to petitioner indicated its falsity. It was lastly submitted, there were no criminal antecedents, therefore petitioner was entitled for bail. 6. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, HCGP for respondent no.1 - State submitted there was prima facie material against petitioner and investigation was not yet completed. Delay in filing complaint was explained as due to threat and blackmail by petitioner. Petitioner had also extracted money from victim, which indicated seriousness of offences and impact on society. On said grounds, opposed petition. 7. Sri RH Angadi, advocate for respondent no.2 – complainant submitted that allegations against petitioner were serious and victim was under continuous threat to her life, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 which was justification for delay in filing complaint. Even after, complainant had attempted to be on her own, took up employment at Dharwad and working, petitioner had threatened her at work place abused and assaulted her. Thereafter, other accused had come near her place of residence and created disturbance. In case, petitioner was granted bail, they would continue to threaten complainant. On said ground, sought rejection of petition. 8. Heard learned counsel. 9. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail on conditions? 10. This petition is by accused no.1 for anticipatory bail in Crime no.224/2024 by Vidyagiri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376, 384, 354, 417, 323, 504, 506 and Section 149 of IPC. 11. Offences alleged against petitioner were rape under Section 376 of IPC punishable with imprisonment for not less than 10 years extendable for life; extortion under Section 384 of IPC punishable with imprisonment upto 3 years; criminal - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 force/assault on woman with intent to outrage her modesty under Section 354 of IPC punishable with imprisonment from 1 year upto 5 years; cheating under Section 417 of IPC punishable with imprisonment upto 1 year; voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323 of IPC punishable with imprisonment upto 1 year; intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace under Section 504 of IPC punishable with imprisonment upto 2 years; criminal intimidation under Section 506 of IPC punishable with imprisonment upto 2 years; along with offence under Section 149 of IPC i.e. commission of offence in prosecution of common object. 12. As offence of rape was punishable with imprisonment from 10 years upto life, nature of offences alleged against accused were heinous in nature. Apart from same, there are also allegations about blackmailing victim and extracting money. 13. Though complainant alleges that she was made to pay about Rs.4,75,000/-, neither HCGP nor counsel for respondent no.2 were able to substantiate same, with any material. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 14. Besides, as per complaint first incident of rape occurred more than 7 years ago. And even thereafter, their sexual relationship is alleged to have continued, albeit under threat/blackmail. But until now, no material that would implicate petitioner for threat/blackmail appears to have been collected. 15. Indeed, investigation is still in progress possibility of evidence likely to be collected cannot be a ground to deny bail. Same requires to be considered based on available material, by ensuring grant of bail would not either hamper investigation or facilitate destruction of evidence. 16. At same time, victim stated about marriage with petitioner in year 2021, which she alleges to be illegal and as part of petitioner’s ill-intention to continue sexual relationship with her. Prima facie, somehow relationship between petitioner and victim appears to have endured for nearly 7 years. 17. Hon’ble Supreme Court has in Shivashankar v. State of Karnataka, reported in (2019) 18 SCC 204, held: “4. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is difficult to sustain the charges levelled against the appellant who may have possibly, made a false promise of marriage to the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 complainant. It is, however, difficult to hold sexual intercourse in the course of a relationship which has continued for eight years, as “rape” especially in the face of the complainant's own allegation that they lived together as man and wife.” (emphasis supplied) 18. Concerns of prosecution that grant of anticipatory bail was likely to hamper investigation, petitioner was likely to threaten or intimidate victim or prosecution witnesses etc, can be met by imposing appropriate stringent conditions. Under above circumstances, point for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, following: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused no.1 shall be enlarged on bail, in case of arrest in Crime no.224/2024 by Vidyagiri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376, 384, 354, 417, 323, 504, 506 and Section 149 of IPC, subject to following conditions: a) Petitioner/accused no.1 shall appear before Investigating Officer within 15 days from date of this order and execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for likesum. b) He shall appear before Investigating Officer for purpose of investigation - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3665 CRL.P No. 100313 of 2025 as and when required and co- operate with investigation. c) Until filing of charge sheet, he shall also mark his attendance with Investigating Officer between 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. every alternative Sunday, beginning from 02.03.2025. d) He shall not attempt to contact, threaten or intimidate victim or tamper / influence any other prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly. e) He shall not indulge in any criminal activities. f) He shall forthwith inform any change of his residence to Investigating Officer. g) Observations made herein are on prima facie consideration for purposes of this order and shall not bind Trial Court. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD,RH CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20