Karnataka High Court
Sri Purushotham vs State Of Karnataka on 7 April, 2017
Author: Rathnakala
Bench: Rathnakala
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1085 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. SRI PURUSHOTHAM
S/O SRIRAMULU,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
2. SRI. ASHOK KUMAR
S/O SUDARSHAN MAHARAN,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
NAGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
(NEAR CRPF) YELAHANKA HOBLI,
BANGALORE - 560 064.
... PETITIONERS
(By SRI. ASIM MALIK, ADV., AND
SRI. B. CHANDRASESHAR, ADV.,)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
YELAHANKA NEW TOWN
POLICE STATION
BANGALORE - 65.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 01.
... RESPONDENT
(By SRI. B. J. ESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
2
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF
THEIR ARREST IN CR. NO.53/2016 OF YELAHANKA NEW
TOWN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, WHICH IS
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 354A, 354C,
354D, 506, 376 OF IPC AND 4, 6 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
The respondent-police registered a case against the petitioners in their Crime No.53/2016 in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(C), 354(D), 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2. Petitioners were enlarged on bail by the Trial Court. Subsequently, on coming to know that the prosecution during further course of investigation has included offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and offences punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of 3 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act'), the petitioners approached the Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.9518/2016 seeking anticipatory bail in respect of higher offences. The same was dismissed. At the same time, the prosecution also moved an application for cancellation of the bail in view of including of the higher offences. The said application was also dismissed by the Sessions Court. Thus, the petitioners are before this Court.
3. During the pendency of the petition, charge- sheet is filed in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(C), 354(D), 376, 201, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. The allegation is, prosecutrix aged about 17-18 years, for last seven months was sexually assaulted by the accused persons. She was subjected to rape over and again.
4
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader while opposing the petition submits that after filing of the charge-sheet since the accused persons failed to appear before the Court, NBW was issued and absconding accused is not entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail as per the catena of judgments of this Court and Apex Court.
5. Clarifying the situation, Sri. Asim Malik, learned counsel for the petitioners would submits that since the Sessions Court rejected their application seeking anticipatory bail in respect of higher offences they apprehended arrest and since present petition was pending before this Court, they had not appeared before the Court. If short accommodation is provided, the petitioners will surrender before the concerned Court. The learned counsel further undertakes on behalf of the petitioners that both the petitioners will not enter the 5 building where the prosecutrix is presently residing i.e., in the house of CW.1.
6. Having regard to the fact that the investigation is already complete and the petitioners have undertaken to surrender before the concerned Court, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioners are granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.53/2016 registered by the respondent-police for a period of two weeks.
Within the above period, the petitioners shall surrender before the concerned Court and move for regular bail.
Till disposal of their regular bail petition, this order will be in force.
In the event of their arrest within the above period by the respondent-police, they shall be released on bail 6 on each of them executing a self-bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum.
The petitioners shall not for whatsoever reason approach CW.1 or C.W.2 either directly or indirectly and shall not threaten or prevail upon them.
In event of violation of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE PMR