Karnataka High Court
Sri Satish vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 January, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9821/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI SATISH,
S/O GURUMURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
R/AT THUMEMEPALLI VILLAGE,
HANUMANTHARAYANAPALLI,
METTIMARI HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK,
CHIKBALLAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI ABHISHEK PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
BAGEPALLI POLICE STATION,
BAGEPALLI TALUK,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.
2. KAMAREDDY T.N.,
S/O LATE NARAYAN REDDY,
THUMEMEPALLI VILLAGE,
METTIMARI HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR-561 207. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K.K. KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP FOR R-1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.246/2021 OF BAGEPALLI P.S., CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
2
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 363 AND 376
OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4, 6 AND 17 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.246/2021 of Bagepalli Police Station, Chikkaballapura District, for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act' for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that the victim girl aged about 16 years 4 months was subjected to sexual act by the petitioner and the complaint is lodged based on the statement of the victim girl and the matter is investigated by recording the 164 statement before the learned Magistrate and now the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is also filed 3 invoking the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in 161 statement before the police, the victim girl has stated that she and the petitioner fell in love with each other. Six months back itself sexual act was done with the consent and when the said fact came to the knowledge of the parents, they advised her. The learned counsel would submit that the information was given to the police at 11.30 a.m., but he was taken to custody at 8.00 a.m. in terms of the statement of the victim girl. Hence, it is clear the he was arrested even before registration of the case. It is mere case of malafide on the part of the police in registering the case.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the victim girl in her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. has categorically stated that she was subjected to sexual act against her wish and apart from that, in the 164 statement also allegation is made against this petitioner that she was taken to the land of others and subjected to sexual act. When such 4 specific allegation is made by the victim girl as well as the medical evidence discloses that her hymen was not intact, there is a prima facie material against the petitioner herein.
6. Having heard the respective learned counsel and on perusal of the material on record, it is not in dispute that the victim girl is aged about 16 years 4 months. Taking note of the 161 statement, though the victim girl has stated that both of them are loving each other, but specific allegation is made in the statement that he had committed sexual act against her wish and in her 164 statement she has stated that she was taken to the land of someone else and this petitioner committed the offence of sexual act. Apart from 161 statement of the victim girl and 164 statement, medical evidence also corroborates that she was subjected to sexual act. When such material is available before the Court, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that there are discrepancies in registering of the case and apprehending the accused, cannot be a ground to enlarge him on bail. The Court has to look into the prima facie material at the time of enlarging the petitioner while exercising the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. and hence I do not find 5 any merit in the petition since sexual act is committed against the minor girl.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD