Karnataka High Court
Vittal S/O Kariyappa Dyavannavar vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2017
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRL. P. NO. 102344/2017
BETWEEN:
VITTAL S/O KARIYAPPA DYAVANNAVAR,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC.: COOLIE,
R/O SHIPARAMATTI, TQ: BADAMI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
- PETITIONER
(BY SRI P.N. HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY NARAGUND POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH DHARWAD.
- RESPONDENT
(BY SRI ANAND K. NAVALAGIMATH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
NARAGUND P.S. CRIME NO. 176/2017 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/S 366(A), 376(2)(F)(J)(I) OF IPC AND SEC. 4 AND
5(n) OF POCSO ACT, 2012 & ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This bail petition is filed u/S 439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking his release on regular bail in Nagagund P.S. Crime No. 176/2017 registered for the offences punishable u/S 366(A), 376(2)(F)(J)(I) of IPC besides Sec. 4 and 5(n) of POCSO Act, 2012. Since from the date of arrest the petitioner is in judicial custody and hence the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is seeking his release on regular bail amongst other grounds urged in this petition.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
On filing of the complaint by the complainant Bhirappa Nelaguddad, being the father-in-law of the accused and the father the father of the victim girl, it is alleged in the complaint that on 04.08.2017 in the morning at about 11.00 O'clock that his minor daughter by name Bhimavva had gone from the house for applying scholarship to Nemmadi Kendra, but she did not return. On suspicion he has filed a complaint alleging that the victim girl might have been abducted by the 3 accused. On filing of the complaint, a case was registered and thereafter proceeded with the case for investigation. On the voluntary statement given by the accused it reveals that the accused had sexually assaulted over her person. Upon investigation, charge sheet has been laid for the offences punishable u/S 366(A), 376(2)(F)(J)(I) of IPC besides Sec. 4 and 5(n) of POCSO Act, 2012.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned SPP for the State and also perused the records.
4. Whereas in the complaint it reveals that the victim Bheemavva being the minor girl is said to be the sister-in-law of the accused and so also the daughter of the complainant. However, it is alleged in the complaint that the accused is alleged to have abducted the victim and also had sexual assault on her. The petitioner in the petition has contended that the complainant in order to harass the petitioner herein has filed the complaint. Further, the victim had undergone 4 medical examination and in the age estimation report her age is estimated between 18 and 21 years. This aspect is also required to be considered as per the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, apart from the other grounds urged in the bail petition.
5. Subsequent to registration of the crime investigation has been conducted recording the statements of the witnesses and drawing mahazars in the presence of the panch witnesses. Initially, the crime was registered for the offence punishable u/S 366-A but in the charge sheet the offence under the provisions of POCSO Act are also included. It is contended that the petitioner herein is in judicial custody from the date of his arrest and if he kept behind bar for a longer period his family members will loose bread winner and also ruined in the society. The accused is ready to abide by any terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court while granting bail to him. Hence, learned counsel appearing for the 5 petitioner sought to allow the bail petition as he is ready to abide the conditions.
6. Per contra learned SPP opposing the bail petition contended that based upon the complaint filed by the complaint, case was registered and upon investigation the IO laid the charge sheet for the alleged offences. It is alleged that the accused had sexually assaulted over the person of the victim and the same is reflected in the statement u/S 164 of Cr.P.C. If the accused is released on bail certainly he would come in the way of the prosecution and destroy the evidence. Hence, sought for dismissal of the petition, as the accused is not deserving for bail.
7. Having regard to the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the accused and the learned HCGP and on perusal of the materials on record it reveals that during the course of investigation on the basis of the statement given by the victim the offence u/S 376 and other provisions of IPC came to be included including the offences under the 6 provisions of POCSO Act. There is also no dispute about the relationship between the complainant and the accused as they being the father-in-law as well as son-in-law. The medical report relating to the age of the victim reveals that the age of the victim girl is between 18 to 21 years. The charge sheet is already laid. Therefore, at this stage it does not require detail discussion while considering the bail petition. The material collected by the IO during the course of investigation are enough so as to frame charge against the accused but it cannot be said that the prosecution has produced enough materials in order to deny bail to the petitioner herein. Considering the statement of witnesses and also mahazar conducted by the IO so also the report collected from the concerned authorities I am of the opinion that the petitioner is deserving for bail. The apprehension of the learned SPP could be met with by imposing suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of prosecution. 7
For the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is deserving for grant of bail. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER Bail petition filed u/S 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed subject to the following conditions.
1) Petitioner shall execute his personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court in connection with Navalgund P.S. Crime No. 176/2017 (S.C. No. 57/2017);
2) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the prosecution witnesses;
3) The petitioner shall appear before the Court of law on all the dates of hearing without fail;
4) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned S.H.O. once in a month on a Sunday of 8 the first week in between 10 AM and 5 PM pending disposal of the entire case;
5) The petitioner shall not indulgence with any offences henceforth.
If the petitioner violates any of the conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
SD/-
JUDGE bvv