Karnataka High Court
Hanumanthappa S/O Tukkappa Lamani vs The State Of Karnataka, on 28 April, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100861/2017
BETWEEN:
HANUMANTHAPPA S/O TUKKAPPA LAMANI
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: ALLIPUR, TQ: SAVANUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI .S.M.KALWAD, ADVOCATE.)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH SAVANUR PS,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARWAD.
REP. BY ITS SPP.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K. UPPAR HCGP.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
REGULAR BAIL UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. IN CRIME NO.
179 OF 2016 REGISTERED BY THE SAVANUR POLICE STATION
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 363,
376(2)(N), 114, 509 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND
SECTION 4, 6, AND 12 OF POCSO ACT 2012.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking his release on bail of the offence punishable under Section 376(1)(n), 363 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 4, 6, 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered in respondent-Police Station Crime No.179/2016
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the alleged offence of kidnap is concerned there is no material collected by the Investigating Officer that the present petitioner kidnapped the victim girl from her house, he also made the submission that, even the charge sheet material taken into consideration they gave the impression that victim girl herself went along with the petitioner. Learned Counsel submitted that sofar as alleged offence of forcible sexual intercourse is concerned :3: there is no specific mention in the statement of the victim girl. Even medical records are not supporting to the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submitted that, the allegations are against accused No.2 that, he instigated the present petitioner/accused No.1 to do the sexual assault on the victim girl. Learned counsel submitted that even for that also there is no material to support the said allegation, investigation is completed, charge sheet also has been filed, Hence, he submitted to allow the petition and to admit the petitioner on regular bail.
4. Per contra, the learned HCGP has made the submission that, looking to the statement of the victim girl given before the Magistrate Court under Section 164 of Cr.P.C so also the statement of the mother of the victim girl they prime-facie goes to show the involvement of the petitioner in committing offence. He also submitted that, even the medical records also goes to show that such offences has taken place. Hence he submitted that the age :4: of the victim girl is 16 years, 06 months and there are offences even under the provisions of the POCSO Act. Hence, the learned HCGP made the submission that petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and entire charge sheet material produced by the petitioner along with petition. Sofar as age is concerned, it is case of the prosecution that, victim girl age is 16 years and 6 months as on the date of the alleged offence. I have perused the medical records regarding the examination of the victim girl and looking to the said records sofar as local examination of the victim girl is concerned doctor mentioned hymen is ruptured and the statement of the victim girl also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C before the Magistrate Court, wherein she also made allegation as against the present petitioner. The offences are also under the provisions of the POCSO Act because of girl is below age of 18 years. All these materials put together and there it prima-facie goes to :5: show the involvement of the present petitioner in committing the offence, hence looking to the seriousness of the offence, it is not fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE CKK