IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 15633 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /

482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SUNIL H B S/O LATE BASAVARAJAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS PRESENTLY AT No.565

3^RD CROSS, RUKMINI NAGARA BENGALURU – 560 073. AS PER AADHAR CARD:

No.733, BELUR ROAD, HOYSALA BADAVANE HALEBEEDU, HASSAN KARNATAKA- 573 121.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUDHANVA D S, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by AND:

LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJAS HRI Location: HIGH COURT OF 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA BY PEENYA POLICE STATION REP.BY S.P.P HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP SRI AKEIF UR INAYATH, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.No.597/2025 REGISTERED BY THE PEENYA POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS

351(2),69,75(2),75(1) OF BNS 2023.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the accused No.1 under Section 482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.597/2025 of Peenya Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 69, 75(2), 75(1) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent/State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the victim is aged about 36 years and she is unmarried. As per averments of the complaint, there are two incidents, one on 11.12.2024 and second one during February 2025. But the FIR came to be filed on 24.10.2025 and there is a delay of 10 months in filing the complaint. The delay is not explained in the averments of the complaint. The victim was knowing that the petitioner is married and therefore, there is no question of making any false promise of marriage. The averments of the complaint regarding the sexual intercourse and promise to marry are inserted subsequently. The victim went to media and to restrain the media and the victim, petitioner has filed a suit wherein he has been granted ex-parte temporary injunction restraining the victim and others from making any publication. The victim earlier had filed a complaint against Subramanya of borrowing Rs.10,00,000/- in which, his statement has been recorded wherein he has stated that he had a relationship with the victim. The petitioner is a diabetic patient. Now he has been kept under suspension and therefore, there is no question of him hampering the investigation and tampering the prosecution witnesses. He places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Biswajyoti Chatterjee vs. State of West Bengal and another (2025 INSC 458) on the point that consensual sex under the promise of marriage does not amount to rape. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that the averments of the complaint indicate that the victim has been used by the petitioner by calling her to his house. There are phone conversations and exchange of messages and they have been collected by the IO. The petitioner is now kept under suspension. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings wherein further investigation has been stayed till next date and therefore, there is no threat of immediate arrest of the petitioner. The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 10 years. The petitioner has threatened the victim and therefore, now she has filed complaint against the petitioner. On these grounds, he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

6. On the complaint of the victim, a case came to be registered against the petitioner and another in Crime No.597/2025