Kodagu Homestay Owner Palecanda Ponnappa Asks Court To Quash Chargesheet

The owner of a homestay in the Kodagu region has petitioned the Karnataka High Court to quash the chargesheet filed against him in connection with the alleged sexual assault of a United States national. This petition follows a July 15 ruling by the High Court that declared the owner's arrest illegal and ordered the state to pay him Rs 5 lakh in compensation.

The petitioner, Palecanda Ponnappa alias Vishal, was arrested on April 19 by the Kodagu police. In his new petition, scheduled to be heard on July 30, Ponnappa’s advocate Angad Kamath argued that the chargesheet against him should be quashed. Ponnappa now faces charges of intentional omission to give information of an offence and failing to furnish particulars of a foreign guest, after graver charges were dropped when the chargesheet was filed on June 7.

The case stems from an alleged incident on April 12, when a US national was brought to the Kodagu homestay from Bengaluru by a taxi driver, Thejas Kumar. The victim initially accused the homestay's resident cook, Vrijesh Kumar Ray, of spiking her welcome drink and sexually assaulting her. She later provided a video statement on May 30 accusing the taxi driver, Kumar, of also assaulting her under the guise of giving a massage. Both Ray and Kumar face charges of sexual assault.

Ponnappa has argued that he was not present at the homestay when the alleged offence took place. According to his petition, technical evidence and the survivor's own statement place his arrival at the resort around 6 p.m., long after the alleged incident occurred. He maintains that because of his absence, he had no knowledge of the incident and could not have intentionally omitted reporting it.

On July 7, the Karnataka High Court ordered a stay on the trial specifically concerning Ponnappa, clarifying that the stay would not affect the ongoing proceedings or investigation against Ray and Kumar. On July 15, the court ruled Ponnappa's arrest illegal because no cognizable offence was cited against him, stating that arrest is a grave intrusion into personal liberty that requires strict compliance with statutory safeguards. However, the court rejected Ponnappa's initial plea to quash the First Information Report (FIR), allowing the broader investigation to continue.