Karnataka High Court
Sri. Dilipa vs State Of Karnataka on 7 November, 2022
Author: Rajendra Badamikar
Bench: Rajendra Badamikar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8446/2022
BETWEEN:
SRI. DILIPA S/O THAMMANNA
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
RESIDENT OF KALKERE VILLAGE
NEAR DODDABYAGATHAVALLI
KASABA HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 211
....PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA .K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HOLENARASIPURA POLICE
REP. BY SPL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. SMT. NASIMA W/O AMEER PASHA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
RESIDIENT OF KALKERE VILLAGE
NEAR DODDABYAGATHAVALLI
KASABA HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 211
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP, R2-SERVED)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.45/2022
REGISTERED BY HOLENARASIPURA RURAL POLICE STATION,
HASSAN FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 354(A), 354(B), 323 OF
IPC AND SECTION 8 AND 12 OF POCSO ACT, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
FTSC-1, HASSAN.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/Accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No.45/2022 of Holenarasipura Rural Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B) and 323 of IPC and under Sections 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act') pending on the file of Addl. District Sessions Court FTSC-1, Hassan
2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that the complainant has lodged a complaint alleging that the victim girl was studying in Urdu Primary School in Doddbyagathavalli Village in 4th standard. On 3 03.06.2022 as usual she returned back from the school in the evening along with one Shifa and again she went to the house of her brother-in-law. At 6.30 p.m. the said Shifa came to the complainant and informed regarding the petitioner taking away victim towards Tammanna's Land. Then complainant went to the spot and noticed that accused was kissing the victim and by seeing the complainant he fled from the spot and then she lodged a complaint. On the basis of the complaint investigating officer has registered a crime and the accused/petitioner was arrested on 04.06.2022 and subsequently, during the course of investigation the statement of the victim was also recorded. After investigation, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the accused/petitioner herein for the above said offences. The petitioner has approached the learned sessions judge and his bail petition came to be rejected. Hence, he is before this Court.
4
3. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. Perused the records.
4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a false complaint has been lodged and he has also contended that there are lot of inconsistency in the complaint and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. He would also contend that though there is submission regarding biting on cheek no such evidence is forthcoming and hence, considering these facts and circumstances, he would contend that investigation is concluded and presence of the petitioner is no more required by the investigating agency and as such sought for allowing the petition.
5. The learned HCGP would seriously opposed the bail petition.
5
6. Having heard the arguments and perusing the records, it is evident that the allegations are in respect of accused kissing the minor child and spit inside her mouth. It is also alleged that he bite on her cheek and later on he removed her leggings and touched her private part and other parts of the body. In this regard the investigating officer has submitted a charge sheet. The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of the Court stating that though there are allegations of biting on the cheek, medical evidence does not disclose the same and on perusal of the wound certificate, it is evident that bite mark were present on the mouth on the right side. Further it is also evident that there was abrasions around her mouth. No doubt these injuries are simple, but the physical examination of the victim clearly disclose that the victim was terrified and cried for help. These documents speak in volume regarding the impact of the incident on the minor child. Further the statement of the minor child was also 6 recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the magistrate and she has supported the case of the prosecution by narrating the incident. No doubt there are certain variances in the complaint and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. but regarding the sexual assault both statements support each other. Under these circumstances, looking to the facts and circumstances and considering the terrifying status of the victim, this is too early to consider the bail petition filed by the present petitioner. No doubt the investigation is completed, but that itself is not a ground and complainant has also filed objection statement asserting that they are all scared.
7. Looking to these facts and circumstances, in my considered opinion, this is not a fit case wherein the discretion can be exercised in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the petition being devoid of any merits and does not survive for consideration. Hence, the petition needs 7 to be rejected and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition stands rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE NS CT:NR