Karnataka High Court Declares Homestay Owner’s Arrest Illegal, Awards Rs 5 Lakh Compensation

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday declared the arrest of Palecanda Ponnappa, owner of a homestay in Kodagu district, as illegal. Ponnappa had been arrested in connection with the alleged sexual assault of a US national in April. The court strongly criticised the police for bypassing legal procedures and asserted that a citizen's fundamental rights cannot be bartered away under pressure from foreign embassies.

Justice M Nagaprasanna, in his order, noted that the police arrested Ponnappa without any discernible justification and without adherence to statutory safeguards. The court directed the state government to pay Ponnappa Rs 5 lakh as compensation within four weeks, describing it as a 'constitutional balm' for the violation of his dignity and liberty.

The case originated from a complaint forwarded by a 33-year-old US tourist through the American Embassy. She alleged that an employee at the homestay spiked her drink and sexually assaulted her on April 12. The police registered an FIR on April 18 under charges of rape, criminal intimidation, and concealing design to commit an offence, and arrested both the helper and the homestay owner.

Ponnappa's counsel argued that his fundamental rights were violated, pointing out that while the helper was accused of a cognisable offence (rape), the charges against the owner were entirely non-cognisable. The state prosecutor countered that the arrest was necessary to uncover the facts and that since Ponnappa had already been granted bail, the question of the arrest's legality was moot.

The court, however, rejected these arguments. It noted that Ponnappa was not present at the homestay when the alleged assault occurred and had no direct role in the crime. Charging him with rape was 'wholly incongruous,' the court said. The remaining charges, dealing with omission of information or disappearance of evidence, were non-cognisable. Despite this, the police detained Ponnappa overnight and recorded a formal arrest at 5 am the next day.

Invoking landmark Supreme Court rulings, including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) and D K Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), the court said that arrest is not a 'ritualistic exercise' or a starting tool for investigation. 'Every arrest carries consequences far beyond physical restraint; it strips a person of liberty, subjects him to humiliation, curtails his freedom, and often leaves behind an indelible scar upon reputation and dignity,' the court observed.

Justice Nagaprasanna added a sharp reminder regarding diplomatic pressure: 'Merely because the Embassy of the United States of America or any other country would communicate a complaint to the investigating agencies of this nation, it would not mean that the fundamental rights of the citizens of the nation should be bartered away.'

While the court held the arrest illegal and awarded compensation, it refused to cancel the criminal investigation against Ponnappa. The bench ruled that the police must be allowed to investigate the underlying allegations and determine whether any omission of information occurred on the owner's part.