<p>The high court has rejected the bail petition filed by an assistant executive engineer of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) in a case of alleged rape.</p>.<p>Justice H P Sandesh observed that the petitioner is a government employee is not a ground to enlarge him on bail, when serious offence of rape is alleged.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that a false case has been registered against him. He further contended that the alleged incident had taken place on September 14, 2021 and the complaint was filed on November 3, 2021.</p>.<p>The counsel for the petitioner submitted that his client is in custody since November 14, 2021 and if he is continued in custody, it will affect his career.</p>.<p>The high court pleader for the state government argued that the victim has given a statement under section 164 of the CrPC before the magistrate.</p>.<p>In this statement, she has categorically stated that she was subjected to a sexual act and the accused had also issued a life threat.</p>.<p>The court pointed out that in the statement, the victim has stated that her marriage was fixed with some other person and hence, after the incident, the accused had promised that he would marry her.</p>.<p>The court rejected the petition, looking into the medical evidence as well as the opinion given by the doctor.</p>.<p>“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, when serious offence of rape is alleged against the petitioner,” the court said. </p>.<p><strong>Watch latest videos by DH here:</strong></p>
<p>The high court has rejected the bail petition filed by an assistant executive engineer of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) in a case of alleged rape.</p>.<p>Justice H P Sandesh observed that the petitioner is a government employee is not a ground to enlarge him on bail, when serious offence of rape is alleged.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that a false case has been registered against him. He further contended that the alleged incident had taken place on September 14, 2021 and the complaint was filed on November 3, 2021.</p>.<p>The counsel for the petitioner submitted that his client is in custody since November 14, 2021 and if he is continued in custody, it will affect his career.</p>.<p>The high court pleader for the state government argued that the victim has given a statement under section 164 of the CrPC before the magistrate.</p>.<p>In this statement, she has categorically stated that she was subjected to a sexual act and the accused had also issued a life threat.</p>.<p>The court pointed out that in the statement, the victim has stated that her marriage was fixed with some other person and hence, after the incident, the accused had promised that he would marry her.</p>.<p>The court rejected the petition, looking into the medical evidence as well as the opinion given by the doctor.</p>.<p>“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, when serious offence of rape is alleged against the petitioner,” the court said. </p>.<p><strong>Watch latest videos by DH here:</strong></p>
