- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1492 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: ARUN T A S/O ASHOKAN T N AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT THOTTUPARA HOUSE MINI STADIUM VADANAPALYA THRISSUR KERALA -680 619 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.S.CHANDRAMOULY, SR.COUNSEL ALONG WITH SRI.RAJATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF BELLANDUR P S BENGALURU REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU -560 001 2. SMT RATNA W/O LATE GANESH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT 004 NEAR MAIN GATE RELIABLE LAKE DEW RESIDENCY HARALURU MAIN ROAD OPP NARAYAN HIGH SCHOOL BENGALURU -560 012 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER ENLARGING THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN CR.NO.227/2025 DTD 29.05.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 66(E) OF THE I.T ACT, 2008, U/S 64,78 R/W 3(5) OF THE BNSS ACT, U/S 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PENDING BEFORE THE LD. LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH- 71). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant who is arrayed as accused No.1 seeking regular bail for the offence punishable under Section 66(E) of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sections 64 and 78 read with Section 3(5) of B.N.S, 2023. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that Smt. Rathna wife of Ganesh lodged a complaint before the respondent – Police stating that she had been to Kerala Perringottukar Temple, situated at Trissur, on 16.11.2024 for the purpose of performing the pooja, there she met the appellant. He instructed her that she has to perform pooja as someone - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 has done black magic to her family. In that context, he took her phone number. 3. On 07.03.2025, at about 8.30 P.M he called through his mobile phone and insisting her to go for video call during mid-night. On 10.03.2025, around about mid-night 12.11 A.M, he called her mobile through video call and he was in bare body and insisting her to be undressed. When she resisted, he threatened her that due to black magic entire family will be suffered etc. She became nude on his instruction. Thereafter, on several occasions she went to Trissur, there she had been subjected to sexual assault. Hence, a complaint came to be registered against the appellant and another. 4. Heard Sri. H.S. Chandramouli, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri.Rajath, learned counsel for appellant, submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and he is innocent of the alleged offences. In case, if the appellant has really committed the said offences, she would have lodged a complaint at the first instance. 5. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2 in order to defame the reputation of the appellant filed a false - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 case in Bengaluru even though the alleged incident had taken place at Trissur. The appellant is ready to abide the condition imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. 6. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently defended the respondent No.2 and the State, she further submitted that the appellant being a priest induced the woman who is unable to understand the rituals of the temple and misused the liberty given to him. Therefore, he is not entitled for any relief as prayed for. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, it can be inferred on reading the averments of the complaint and other materials available on record that the victim was the consenting party and she was chatting with the appellant on several occasions. Be that as it may, the matter has to be subjected to investigation for the purpose of filing the final report. At this juncture, without adverting to the merit of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions that would be met the apprehension of the prosecution. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 ORDER i. The Criminal Appeal is allowed. ii. The appellant is enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one local surety to the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court. iii. The appellant shall not threaten the prosecution witness and he shall co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required. iv. The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court as and when it is required. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29555 CRL.A No. 1492 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [ARUN T A VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER] 06.08.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORDERS ON ‘FOR BEING SPOKEN TO’ This Court vide order dated 31.07.2025 granted bail to the appellant by imposing the condition that the appellant has to furnish one local surety. It is clarified that ‘local surety’ means surety within the State of Karnataka. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE UN List No.: 5 Sl No.: 1