Karnataka High Court
Dr. Harshit. Y. R vs State By Karnataka By on 14 May, 2026
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766
CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7146 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1. DR. HARSHIT. Y. R.
S/O RAMU Y.V.,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
WORKING AS RADIOLOGIST,
NAVI DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,
K.R. PETE TOWN,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571426
RESIDING AT NO. 561,
CBI COLONY, INKAL,
MYSURU - 570008
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. KUMARA K G., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
SUMA B N
Location: AND:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. STATE BY KARNATAKA BY
K.R. PET RURAL POLICE STATION,
MANDYA-571401
REPRESENTED BY
HIGH COURT BUILDING
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
BANGALORE-560001
2. SMT.PADMAMMA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766
CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026
HC-KAR
GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL
NON-GAZETTED,
CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
KR PETE, MANDYA DISTRICT-571426
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.THEJESH.P., HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE ON BAIL IN CR.NO.123/2026
REGISTERED BY K.R PET TOWN POLICE STATION, MANDYA,
FOR OFFENCES U/S 376(2)(n) R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND SEC.6
AND 21 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 PENDING BEFORE THE C/C
FTSC-II AT MANDYA.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner, who is accused No.3 in Crime No.123/2026 registered by K.R. Pet Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (n) r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 6 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) is before this Court seeking grant of regular bail.
2. A complaint came to be filed by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant alleging that on an inspection conducted by Lokayuktha on 17.04.2026, at the Private Scanning Centers -3- NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR including the one belonging to petitioner, the scanning report disclosed the LMP date as 25.11.2023 and the date of birth of the girl mentioned in the card as 13.12.2005, thus indicating the age of the victim girl being below 18 years. Taking note of this aspect of the matter, it is further alleged that the petitioner herein had failed to discharge the mandatory duty as contemplated under Section 19 of the POCSO Act and not taking necessary steps for protection of the victim girl by reporting the same to the concerned, has resulted in registration of Crime No.123/2026 for the offences noted as above.
3. The petitioner was arrested. His application seeking bail filed before the Fast Track Special Court-II at Mandya under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 came to be rejected vide order dated 08.05.2026. Consequently, the present petition is filed by the petitioner seeking grant of bail.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner taking this Court through the records submits that even if the allegations in the complaint are taken on face value, there is no -4- NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR justification of any nature whatsoever to keep him under confinement, as the alleged offence is bailable.
5. Learned Senior counsel further points out there is no prohibition under the Act for granting of bail as the nature of the allegation against the petitioner is only of him not informing the concerned as contemplated under Section 19 of the POCSO Act, the same cannot be equated to the offence otherwise contemplated under POCSO Act. Hence, seeks for allowing the petition.
6. Learned HCGP on the other hand submits that there is dereliction of duty on the part of the petitioner which has resulted in filing of the complaint and consequent arrest. Hence, opposes the bail petition.
7. Heard. Perused the records.
8. The complaint indicates that an inspection was conducted by the Lokayuktha in the Scanning Center of the petitioner, wherein, scanning report disclosed LMP date of the victim girl as 25.11.2023 whose date of birth was mentioned as 13.12.2005 in the records. It is this fact which has triggered -5- NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR setting the law into motion resulting in confinement of the petitioner.
9. Section 19 of the POCSO Act reads as under:
"19. Reporting of offences.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of1974)any person(including the child), who has apprehension that an offence under this Act is likely to be committed or has knowledge that such an offence has been committed, he shall provide such information to,--
(a) the Special Juvenile Police Unit; or (b) the local police.
(2) Every report given under sub-section (1) shall be--
(a) ascribed an entry number and recorded in writing; (b) be read over to the informant; (c) shall be entered in a book to be kept by the Police Unit.
(3) Where the report under sub-section (1) is given by a child, the same shall be recorded under sub-section (2) in a simple language so that the child understands contents being recorded.
(4) In case contents are being recorded in the language not understood by the child or wherever it is deemed necessary, a translator or an interpreter, having such qualifications, experience and on payment of such fees as may be prescribed, shall be provided to the child if he fails to understand the same.
(5) Where the Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police is satisfied that the child against whom an offence has been committed is in need of care and protection, then, it shall, after recording the reasons in writing, make immediate arrangement to give him such care and protection including admitting the child into shelter home or to the nearest hospital within twenty-four hours of the report, as may be prescribed.
(6) The Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police shall, without unnecessary delay but within a period of twenty-
four hours, report the matter to the Child Welfare Committee and the Special Court or where no Special Court has been designated, to the Court of Session, including need of the child for care and protection and steps taken in this regard.
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR (7) No person shall incur any liability, whether civil or criminal, for giving the information in good faith for the purpose of sub-section (1)."
10. The non-compliance of the provisions of Section 19 would result in action being taken under Section 21 of the POCSO Act which reads as under:
"21. Punishment for failure to report or record a case.--(1) Any person, who fails to report the commission of an offence under sub-section (1) of section 19 or section 20 or who fails to record such 11 offence under sub-section (2) of section 19 shall be punished with imprisonment of either description which may extend to six months or with fine or with both.
(2) Any person, being in-charge of any company or an institution (by whatever name called) who fails to report the commission of an offence under sub-section (1) of section 19 in respect of a subordinate under his control, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and with fine.
(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to a child under this Act."
11. The punishment, thus, contemplated under Section 21 of the POCSO Act is six months or with fine or with both.
12. The said offence under any circumstances, as rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel, is bailable. -7-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR
13. There is no reason or justification either in respondent-Police keeping the petitioner under confinement or Fast Track Special Court rejecting his bail application.
14. The learned Senior counsel also brings to the notice of this Court the judgment of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack passed under similar circumstances, in the case of Ramesh Chandra Sahu Vs State of Orissa reported in (2025) SCC Online Orissa 3870 wherein the said Court taking note of Table II of First Schedule of BNSS, 2023 providing for classification of offences against other laws has come to the conclusion that allegation of non-compliance of Section 19 of the POCSO Act discloses commission of bailable offences. It is settled law that in case of bailable offences accused has right to be released on bail with or without any surety provided he is prepared to furnish personal bond. That the Special Court should not have remanded the accused - petitioner to custody by refusing the bail.
15. Thus, referring to the aforesaid Judgment, learned Senior counsel submits that the Special Court in the instant case has failed to exercise its jurisdiction. -8-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR
16. The facts narrated above and in the light of the provisions of law noted above, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the petition by granting bail to the petitioner.
17. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.123/2026 of K.R. Pet Rural Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (n) r/w. Section 34 of IPC and Sections 6 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:
a) The Accused No.3/Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.
b) The Accused No.3/Petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;-9-
NC: 2026:KHC:24766 CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026 HC-KAR
c) The Accused No.3/Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;
d) The Accused No.3/Petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;
e) Communicate copy of this order to Trial court and concerned Prison authorities forthwith.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45