SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 39539

- 1 -

CRL.P No. 103108 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103108 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

RAM SHIVPRASAD S/O JAYARAM

ALIAS SHRI SHIVAPRASADRAV RAMARAV

AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,

R/O. DIVAGERI, MAVALLI-2,

MURDESHWAR, TQ. BHATKAL,

DIST. UTTAR KANNADA-581388

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HAREESHA S NAYAK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH MURDESHWAR POLICE STATION,

TQ. BHATKAL, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA

BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001

&RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRASHANT V. MOGALI, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.,

SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ON

ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN MURUDESHWAR P.S. CRIME NO.108/2022

REGISTERED BY THE MURUDESHWAR POLICE STATION FOR

OFFENCES ALLEGED SECTION 370A(2) OF IPC AND U/S 3, 4, 5

AND 6 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT, AND DIRECT THE

RESPONDENT ACCORDINGLY.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

- 2 -

CRL.P No. 103108 of 2022

This petition is filed by accused No.3 under

Section 438 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter referred to as the 8Cr.P.C.9, for brevity)

seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.108/2022 of

Murudeshwar

Police

Station

registered

for

the

offences punishable under Sections 370A(2) of the

Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 8IPC9,

for brevity) and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Immoral

Traffic Prevention Act.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, one

Sri.Mahabaleshwar S.N., CPI, Bhatkal Rural Circle,

has filed the complaint stating that, on 19.09.2022

at

about

12.30pm

at

Shivakrupa

Lodge,

Murudeshwar, the accused colluding together, to

have illegal gain, by misusing the position of the

victim

girls,

called

them

to

Shivakrupa

lodge,

Murudeshwar and kept them in the said lodge for

prostitution

and

collected

amount

from

the

- 3 -

customers. The complainant when conducted raid at

the said lodge, accused Nos.1 and 2 have been

caught red handed and accused No.2 disclosed that

this

petitioner/accused

No.3

knows

running

of

prostitution in the lodge. The said complaint came to

be registered in Crime No.108/2022 by Murudeshwar

Police for the aforesaid offences. The petitioner,

who

is

arrayed

as

accused

No.3

in

the

FIR,

apprehending

his

arrest,

had

filed

Criminal

Miscellaneous No.406/2022 seeking anticipatory bail

and the same came to be rejected by the learned

Principal

District

and

Sessions

Judge,

Uttara

Kannada,

Karwar,

by

order

dated

10.10.2022.

Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking

anticipatory bail.

3.

Heard

the

arguments

of

the

learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned

High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-

State.

- 4 -

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner

would contended that the petitioner is not aware of

any prostitution being run in the lodge which he and

accused No.2 are running on lease basis. It is his

further submission that this petitioner/accused No.3

was not present at the time of the raid by the

complainant.

The

main

allegation

are

against

accused Nos.1 and 2 and they have been granted

bail

by

the

Sessions

Court.

Therefore,

this

petitioner is entitled for grant of bail on the ground

of parity. The offences alleged against the petitioner

are not punishable with death or imprisonment for

life. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the

police in the investigation. With this, he prayed to

allow the petition.

5.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader

would

contend

that

investigation

is

in

progress. The petitioner is required for custodial

interrogation. This petitioner along with accused

No.2 is running the said lodge on lease basis. If the

- 5 -

petitioner

is

granted

anticipatory

bail,

he

will

hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution

witnesses.

With

this,

he

prayed

to

reject

the

petition.

6.

Having regard to the submission made by

the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court

has gone through the averments of the complaint,

FIR and the order passed by the Sessions Court.

7.

The case of the prosecution is that, two

women

were

kept

in

Shivakrupa

lodge,

Murudeshwar, for the purpose of prostitution and

accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught red handed when

raid was conducted by the complainant. Accused

No.2 along with this petitioner/accused No.3 is

running the said lodge on lease basis. Accused Nos.1

and 2 are running prostitution for earning money.

This petitioner/accused No.3 was not present in the

lodge at the time of raid. Accused Nos.1 and 2

- 6 -

against whom, serious allegations are made, have

been granted bail by the Sessions Court. Merely

because this petitioner has filed application for

anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is not

a ground to reject the petition when accused Nos.1

and 2 have been granted bail under Section 439

Cr.P.C. The offences alleged against the petitioner

are not punishable with death or imprisonment for

life except the offence unde

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top