1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2014
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5002/2014
BETWEEN:
N.DHANUSH,
S/O. K.NAGARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
R/AT NO.145/1, 1ST FLOOR,
13TH CROSS, DOMLUR VILLAGE,
BANGALORE- 560 071.

PETITIONER

(BY SRI T.PRAKASH, ADV.,)

AND:
STATE BY AIRPORT P.S
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING- 560 001.

RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438

OF CR.P.C.PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.33/2014 OF AIR PORT
P.S., BANGALORE, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 376, 420 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER
Petitioner is the lone accused in Crime No.33/2014 on the
file of Airport Police Station, Bangalore City. The offences alleged
against him are punishable under Section 376, 420 of IPC. He is
apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police,
hence, he has preferred this petition under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail.

2.
application

Learned Government Pleader has opposed the bail

on

the

ground

that,

prima-facie

case

is

forthcoming in regard to the offence under Section 376 of IPC.

3.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and

perused the records.

4.

The

first

information

is

lodged

by

lady

Ms.Rajeshwari.P on 12.12.2013 disclosing that she had fallen in

love with this petitioner for the past one year prior to filing of the
first information and this petitioner had sexual contact with her
assuring to marry her. In the light of the petitioner having
backed out of his promise to marry her, complaint is filed.

5.

As could be seen from the records, the victim lady-

the first informant had sexual contact with the petitioner on

her own consent. Whether the subsequent denial of marrying
her would amount to rape has been considered at length by
the Apex Court in a case of Uday Kumar vs. State of
Karnataka reported in 2003 (4) SCC 46. It is clearly held in
that case that such act would not amount to rape as defined
under Section 375 of I.P.C. Suffice to state that the petitioner
has undertaken to abide by any conditions that may be
imposed. Thus, the apprehension of the learned HCGP could
be allayed by imposing proper conditions.

6.

Accordingly,

the

petition

is

allowed

and

anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to the

following conditions:

i)

Petitioner shall be released on anticipatory

bail in the event of his arrest in Crime
No.33/2014 on the file of Airport Police
station, on he executing a personal bond for
a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for
the likesum to the satisfaction of the I.O;

ii)

Petitioner shall surrender before the I.O on

or before 24.11.2014;

iii)

Petitioner

shall

cooperate

for

further

investigation;
iv)

Petitioner shall not hold out threats to the

prosecution witnesses or attempt to tamper
them, in any manner;

v)

Petitioner shall not involve himself in any

criminal activities;

SD/JUDGE

KSR