Karnataka High Court
Bharadi Raja @ Bharath vs State By Puttenahalli Police Station on 23 February, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.954/2022
BETWEEN:
BHARADI RAJA @ BHARATH,
S/O PARANDAAMAN,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
R/AT NO. AGARAM SITHTHAMBUR VILLAGE,
MARIYAMMA STREET,
VILLUPURAM TALUK AND DISTRICT
TAMILNADU-607201. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRASANNA RAO R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY PUTTENAHALLI POLICE STATION,
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. PRAKASH,
C/O AT NO. CWC-2, MH,
MARIGOWDA ROAD, DAIRY CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-560023. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAYAKA V.S., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.126/2018 (SPL.C.C.NO.1718/2021 PENDING BEFORE THE
FTSC-1, ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU) OF PUTTENAHALLI P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 366A, 370, 372, 373,
376, 323, 120B READ WITH 34 OF IPC, SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF
2
POCSO ACT, SECTIONS 75 AND 79 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE CARE
AND PROTECTION ACT AND SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6 AND 7 OF ITP
ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS 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.126/2018 of Puttenahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 366A, 370, 372, 373, 376, 323, 120B read with 34 of IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act' for short), Sections 75 and 79 of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of IT Act.
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 of the prosecution is that the charge-sheet is filed for the offence punishable under Sections 366A, 370, 372, 373, 376, 323, 120B read with 34 of IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, Sections 75 and 79 of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 3 and 7 of IT Act. The petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.6.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the due to Corona, from 09.03.2020 to 15.09.2021, he could not appear before the Trial Court, hence split-up case is registered and after split-up case, he voluntarily appeared before the Court and he was taken to custody. The learned counsel submits that due to Corona, he could not appear before the Court and hence he may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner has not appeared before the Trial Court from 09.03.2020 to 15.09.2021 and hence split-up case is registered. Thereafter, an application was filed and the same was rejected.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and also taking note of the reasoning given by the Trial Court, an observation is made that this petitioner was not at all appearing regularly before the Court. On 09.03.2021, NBW was issued and on 15.09.2021 case against 4 this petitioner was split-up and case is of the year 2018 and due to non-appearance of the petitioner there was a delay in trial and hence rejected the bail petition. Having taken note of the fact that Corona was started in the month of March 2020 and the absence of the petitioner is from 09.03.2020 and subsequently NBW was issued and split-up case is registered and for a period of almost 1½ years, he did not appear before the Trial Court. Taking note of the period of Corona and subsequent development and the matter of the year 2018, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to grant bail in favour of the petitioner subject to the condition not to hinder the trial in future and should regularly appear before the Trial Court except for genuine reasons.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.126/2018 of Puttenahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 366A, 370, 372, 373, 376, 323, 120B read with 34 of IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, Sections 75 and 79 of 5 Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of IT Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD