Riyaz.K. M. vs State Of Karnataka on 15 May, 2018

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Riyaz.K. M. vs State Of Karnataka on 15 May, 2018

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MAY 2018

                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

         CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1987/2018

BETWEEN:

Riyaz K.M
S/o Musthafa
Aged about 20 years
Vatekad, Hoddur Village,
Hoddur Post,
Madikeri Taluk,
Kodagu District-571223.
                                        ...PETITIONER
(By Sri. D.P. Prasanna, Advocate)

AND:

State of Karnataka
By Madikeri Rural Police
Madikeri-571201
Represented by SPP
High Court Building
Bengaluru-560001.
                                      ... RESPONDENT
(By Sri. S. Vishwa Murthy, HCGP)

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No. 64/2018 of
Madikeri Rural Police Station, Kodagu for the offence
                             2



P/U/S 354 of IPC and Section 12 of Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3
(1) (w) and 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989.

      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., for grant of regular bail in Crime No.64/2018.

2. Learned High Court Govt. Pleader has not filed any statement of objection, but has orally opposed the petition.

3. The F.I.R came to be registered based on the complaint lodged by the father of the minor girl alleging that on 03.03.2018 at about 3.00 p.m., while the minor daughter of the complainant then studying in 9th standard, was returning from school, the petitioner herein followed her in his motor-cycle and intercepted 3 her on the way and forcibly kissed her and thereby, tried to molest the minor victim.

4. The accusations levelled against the petitioner no doubt are serious in nature, yet, the investigation itself having been completed, I do not find it necessary to extend the custody of the petitioner solely by way of punishment. The accusations made against the petitioner are required to be established in full pledged trial.

5. The learned High Court Govt. Pleader has brought to my notice the statement given by the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

6. In view of the said statement, there cannot be any apprehension of the petitioner either threatening or prevailing upon the petitioner or her parents. Taking into consideration all these circumstances of the case, Petition deserves to be allowed. 4

7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed subject to following conditions:

1. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

2. The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when summoned;

3. He shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in any manner;

4. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior written permission.

Sd/-

JUDGE bnv*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court