Karnataka High Court noted that being a government employee is not a ground to grant bail to an accused alleged of committing rape.
Justice HP Nivas dismissed the petition and stated, “The fact that petitioner is a Government employee is not a ground to enlarge him on bail, when the serious offence of rape is alleged against the petitioner.”
The prosecution submitted that the petitioner took the girl to his Home Stay and subjected her to sexual assault on 14th September 2021. He allegedly committed the offence even though the victim girl was already engaged to some other person.
The victim alleged that the accused promised her that he would marry her and also threatened her not to disclose the incident to anybody otherwise he will take away her life.
Advocate Kemparaju, representing the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is working as Assistant Executive Engineer in KPTCL and a false case has been registered against him since he is a Government employee.
He also questioned the delay of 1½ months in filing a complaint. Advocate Kemparaju submitted that no prima facie case has been made out and the petitioner has been in custody since 14 November 2022.
As per the prosecution, the victim in her statement under Section 164 of CrPC has disclosed that she was subjected to sexual assault and caused a life threat too. The prosecutor went on to add that the medical evidence also proves that the girl was assaulted and therefore, there is a prima facie case against the petitioner.
“From the statement of the victim girl, it is seen that, she has stated that she was subjected to sexual act against her wish and also caused life threat. She has also stated that her marriage was already engaged with another bridegroom and hence, after committing the sexual Court, he promised that he would marry and also caused life threat,” the court said.
The bench added, “Apart from that, medical evidence is also clear that hymen was tear and opinion of the doctor is also clear that, she was subjected to sexual act and material collected not rules out subjecting her for sexual act. When such being the material available on record, the fact that petitioner is a Government employee is not a ground to enlarge him on bail.”
“Prima facie, the medical evidence, as well as the 164 statement, disclose that the fact that victim was subjected to sexual act,” the court added.