SUDEEP Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader.

(2.) Factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that victim had given complaint on 28/4/2022 narrating the fact that this petitioner committed sexual act against her wish on 7/1/2022 and also he threatened not to reveal the same to anybody or otherwise he is going to pour acid on her and hence she did not gave any complaint but he repeated the said act and also he use to make phone calls and threaten her. That on 30/3/2022 at about 8.30 p.m. when she was feeding cattle in the cow shed, he came and suddenly tried to commit sexual act and when she screamed, he assaulted her and her daughter rushed to the spot and having noticed the same, he left the place. When the daughter tried to tell the same to her husband she was consoled her not to reveal the same and she will reveal the same. But immediately she made an attempt to commit suicide by consuming poison and immediately she was shifted to hospital and she also gave statement before the Magistrate on 5/4/2022 and complaint was lodged on 28/4/2022.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that earlier petition was got dismissed since it has become infructuous in view of arresting of the petitioner and submits that investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. He submits that in 164 statement she reiterates the contents of the complaint but her daughter also examined before the Court and she also gave statement before the Magistrate. But in 161 statement she has stated that the incident has taken place on 7/1/2022 and not on 30/3/2022 and also in her 164 statement date is mentioned as 30/3/2022 and there are contradictions in the statement of the daughter. Counsel also submits that earlier husband has given the complaint and FIR was registered for the offences under Ss. 324, 504 and 506 of IPC and in the subsequent complaint an improvement is made wherein he makes an allegation that as there was previous ill-will between the complainant and the accused, the incident has taken place and there are contradictions in the complaint given by husband as well as victim and also the statement of their daughter. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody and there is no need of further custody and hence, he may be enlarged on bail.