(Prayer: This CRL.P filed u/s 439 CR.PC (filed u/s 483 BNNS) by the advocate for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in crime no.3/2026, udupi women P.S. registered by respondent police, pending on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and ACJM at Udupi, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 63(a), 64(2)(m), 69, 89, 318(4), 115(2), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.)

Oral Order:

1. The petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.1, is before this Court seeking regular bail in Crime No.3/2026 registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 63(a), 64(2)(m), 69, 89, 318(4), 115(2), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Brief facts of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant is a married woman having two children. She became acquainted with the petitioner at Bengaluru during treatment to her mother for epilepsy. On 07.03.2021, the petitioner called the complainant to his house situated at Kodihalli, Bengaluru, under the pretext of giving medical report of her mother and when the complainant went to his house, he sexually assaulted the complainant and took her photographs in his mobile. It is further stated that he has repeated the act five to six times, threatening that he would send the photographs to her husband. When the petitioner insisted that she accompany him to have a physical relationship, she refused the said demand. Then, the petitioner sent the photos of the complainant to her husband, as a result of which, the complainant and her husband separated.

3. It is further stated that the complainant became pregnant on many occasions and the petitioner later forced her to abort them. The complainant, on transfer, came to Udupi in the year 2022. When she became pregnant for five months, the petitioner took her to Kerala and tried to cause abortion again. When the complainant resisted, the petitioner called her to KMCT Hospital, Kojikkod and assaulted her in a restroom. Again, in April 2024, when the complainant became pregnant, the petitioner insisted her to go for abortion, but, she refused to undergo the same. On 04.01.2025, the complainant gave birth to a female child at KMC Hospital, Manipal. On this occasion, he promised her that he would marry her. Thereafter, he refused to marry her. Hence the complaint. Based on the said complaint, the respondent - police have registered the case and conducted the investigation.

4. Heard Sri K. Prasanna Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. N. Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State and Smt. Shivani Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of alleged offences. In fact, it is a consensual act, committed with full consent. The alleged incident had taken place in the year 2021. However, the complaint came to be registered by the complainant on 19.01.2026. There is an extraordinary delay in lodging the complaint. The marriage between the complainant and the petitioner has not been solemnized for various reasons, including their belonging to different religions. The petitioner is a Doctor by profession. He is the permanent resident of Kojikkod, Kerala State. He will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently submitted there is a constant threat to the life of the complainant. She is staying with her children and working as an officer at SBI. The petitioner has committed a heinous offence. Being a Doctor, he had promised the complainant that he would marry her and abused her sexually on several occasions. On several occasions, he got her pregnancy terminated. Therefore, he is not entitled for the relief as prayed for in the petition. Making such submission, learned counsel for respondent No.2 prays to reject the petition.

7. Similarly, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State adopted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and prays to reject the bail petition.

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint, it appears from the record that the petitioner got acquainted with the complainant at Bengaluru during her mother’s treatment for epilepsy. It is alleged that the petitioner has misused her and abused her sexually on several occasions, starting from 07.03.2021 till 19.01.2026. It is further alleged that the petitioner has not only assaulted and harassed her on one or the other pretext, in fact, he sent the photos of the complainant to her husband, and consequently, they got separated. Moreover, the petitioner being a Doctor, it appears that, he has committed the heinous offence.

9. Be that as it may, on going through the facts and circumstances of the case, without adverting to the merit of the case, it is proper to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

10. Hence, I proceed to pass a following:-

ORDER

               (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

               (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.3/2026 registered by the respondent-police for the offences stated supra, on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one local surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

               (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.

               (iv)The petitioner shall not threaten or visit the area in which the complainant is residing.

               (v) In case the petitioner visits any of the places like, house or working place of the complainant and threatens her, liberty is reserved to the complainant to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.