US tourist’s rape case: homestay owner disputes prosecution

THe possessor of a homestay in Kodagu accused of preventing an American holidaymaker from seeking facilitate after she reported beingness raped at the homestay, has submitted a petition to the tell high court questioning the legality of his arrest and the charges against him, claiming that the prosecution’s narrative differed from that suggested by the victim’s own messages, call records and travel history.The high court had on Monday denied to halt criminal proceedings against the accused, Palakanda Vishal Ponnapa, citing the need to examine investigation records before granting relief.The case concerns the alleged rape of a 33-year-old American woman at the accused’s homestay in Kodagu. Investigators alleged that a staff member raped her after drugging her. The employee— identified as Vrajesh Kumar, was arrested after the complaint was filed and remains in custody.According to the case record presented in court, the alleged rape occurred on April 12. Ponnappa was arrested on April 19 on allegations that he failed to report the matter to authorities and disabled Wi-fi at the homestay to prevent the victim from doing so. He was granted bail on May 2.The petition claims to cite WhatsApp conversations between the victim and Ponnappa on the day of the alleged assault, two purported telephone calls allegedly made by the complainant later in the day, and a lengthy email purportedly sent to seven recipients the next morning, which allegedly did not refer to any incident of rape or sexual assault.Ponnappa has also challenged the legal basis of his arrest. “Section 3(5) BNS appears, on the case file, only in the remand application of 19.04.2026,” the petition alleges.Section 3(5) deals with common intention.According to the filing, the rape allegation under Section 64(1) BNS was directed solely against the housekeeper and not against the homestay owner.The petition also contends that investigators failed to secure potentially important digital evidence, including WiFi logs, router records, call detail records and location information that could verify or disprove competing claims made by the complainant and the accused.“The State has thereby admitted, on the record of this case, that the digital data is available, that it is retrievable, that it can be retrieved only by the Investigating Officer, and that it has not been retrieved,” the petition states.The filing further alleges that when Ponnappa was arrested and produced before a court, several investigative steps remained incomplete, including witness examinations, scientific evidence collection and the recording of statements required under criminal procedure law.Police have maintained that the investigation remains ongoing. Officials previously said forensic examination and digital evidence collection are underway and that all aspects of the case were being examined.A senior police officer, when asked for a comment on the petition, said a detailed report would be submitted before the court in due course.