Karnataka HC Denies Bail To Accused In Alleged Gang Rape Of Physically Disabled Woman, Citing Her Testimony And Medical Evidence

In brief

The question

Whether the petitioner should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the prima facie material, the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, and the circumstances of the case.

The court held

The Court dismissed the petition for regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.

It also directed

It stated that its observations were made only for deciding the bail petition.

01Facts

The petitioner, accused No. 2, sought regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, read with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from Crime No. 94/2022 of Adur Police Station and pending as S.C. No. 103/2022.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and accused No. 1 took a physically challenged 18-year-old victim into a house and raped her.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

The petitioner had been arrested and remained in judicial custody; investigation was complete and a charge-sheet had been filed.

p. 3 · ¶ 4 · p. 4 · ¶ 5

He relied on alleged omissions and contradictions in the victim’s statements and on Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. and Another.

p. 4 · ¶ 5–6

The State and the victim’s counsel opposed bail, citing the allegations, supporting medical evidence, and the risk of witness tampering.

pp. 4–5 · ¶ 7

02Issues

i.Whether the petitioner should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the prima facie material, the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, and the circumstances of the case.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 9–12

ii.Whether the petitioner’s reliance on Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. and Another supported the grant of bail in this case.

p. 6 · ¶ 11

03Law Applied

The Court considered its bail jurisdiction under Section 439 of the CrPC, corresponding to Section 483 of the BNSS, and the charges under Sections 341, 212, 376(2)(l), and 376(D), read with Section 34 of the IPC.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 2

In deciding the application, it assessed the prima facie material, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific conduct attributed to the petitioner, and the possibility of absconding or fleeing from justice.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 9–12

The Court noted the precedent relied on by the petitioner but held it inapplicable to the facts before it.

p. 6 · ¶ 11

Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483 Section 183

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 341 Section 212 Section 376 Section 34

04Reasoning

The Court found prima facie material in the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, in which she described the petitioner’s alleged conduct, and in the medical report, which recorded a ruptured hymen and evidence of recent sexual intercourse.

p. 6 · ¶ 10

It also noted that the victim had testified before the trial court and considered the specific allegations, the gravity of the offences, and the risk of the petitioner fleeing from justice.

p. 4 · ¶ 5 · pp. 5–6 · ¶ 9–12

In light of those circumstances, the Court rejected the petitioner’s reliance on Prabhakar Tewari as inapplicable.

p. 6 · ¶ 11