Karnataka High Court
Ganesh Nagappa Suthagatti vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 2017
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102213/2017
BETWEEN
Ganesh Nagappa Suthagatti,
Age: 28 Years, Occ: Private service,
R/o; Suthagatti, Tq: Savadatti,
Dist: Belgavi.
.......Petitioner
(By Sri Ahamad Ali J Rahimansha, Advocate )
AND:
The State of Karnataka
By Hubballi Sub Urban Police Station,
Represented by its
State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Dharwad.
........Respondent
(By Sri Praveen.K Uppar, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., seeking to grant bail and accused be enlarged on bail
and in Crime No.121/2017, Spl. S.C.No.24/2017 Hubballi
Su-Urban Police Station, Hubballi, for the offences under
Section 323, 354(A), 363, 366 of IPC and Section 10 of
POCSO Act.
2
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the court
made the following:
ORDER
This bail petition has been filed by the petitioner accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.121/2017 of Hubballi Sub-Urband Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354(A), 363, 366 of IPC, besides Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012. Since from the date of arrest the accused is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail among the grounds urged therein.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under;
On 08.06.2017, the complainant Bandamma who has filed a complaint before the respondent police alleging that, she had taken her grand-daughter namely Pooja aged about 8 years, being the victim girl to old Bus stand Hubballi and in order to bring her eatables from the Hotel, in the meanwhile, she made her to wait in the canteen and while she has returned, the victim is found to be missing from the canteen. 3 Thereafter, she had been to police station and given a missing compliant. Subsequently, the police made search of missing girl who is aged about 8 years. Then the accused who traced in the alleged crime, wherein the accused who took her to an isolated pace in Garden area and made her assault over her person and also fondled over her private part and her breast and the same has been reflected in the statement said to be recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Wherein the Investigating Officer who has investigated the case and laid charge sheet against the accused for the alleged offences which is reflected in the FIR said to be recorded by the police.
3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP appearing for the respondent - state.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner accused in the alleged crime that the accused who abducted the victim girl who is aged about 8 years. On 08.06.2017, where she was present in the canteen, as her grand-mother being the complainant had been to bring eatables, in the 4 meanwhile, that the girl had not been present in the canteen and found that this accused has been taken her by enticing by providing chocolate in a bakery. Hence, the complainant has filed a complaint before the respondent police, as the police have been registered the crime against the accused thereafter proceed with the case for investigation. During the course of investigation, the statement of the victim has been recorded by the Investigating Officer and her statement has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., but the statement which is said to be recorded by the Investigating Officer, it is created just to harass the accused, wherein the charge sheet laid relating to the accused who abducted the victim girl aged about 8 years, which is implicated in the alleged crime. It is further contended that, since from the date of arrest the accused is in judicial custody, the accused is the only bread winner in the family and his presence is required to eke out the life of dependants as this fact is required to be consider apart from other grounds urged and that he is ready and willing to abide any of the conditions that 5 may be imposed by this Court. Amongst these grounds, he prays for grant of bail by allowing this petition.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent
- state has contended that on filing of the complaint by the complainant being the grand-mother of victim, the crime came to be registered in Crime No.121/2017, wherein the accused who made her to enticing by providing chocolate in a bakery and taken her to Garden area and wherein he had fondled over her person and also assaulted on her back as well as on her person and the same has been reflected in the statement given by the victim before the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and the same has been in conformity with the statement said to be given by the victim as under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer who laid the charge sheet against the accused wherein he conducted the spot mahazar in the presence of pancha witnesses and the same has been shown by the victim who is aged about 8 years. On 08.06.2017, the incident which was taken in between 8.30 a.m. and 9.00 a.m. and the same has been reflected in the charge sheet, wherein 6 it is consisting of statement of witness so also mahazar which has been conducted by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and if the accused is supposed to be released on bail certainly he would come in the way of the prosecution case and destroy the evidence and praying to reject the bail petition.
6. Keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner relating to the case in Crime No.121/2017 came to be registered, it is based upon the complaint filed by the Bandamma being the grand-mother of victim who is aged about 8 years, wherein she had been taken by her grand-mother to old bus stand Hubballi and she had been in order to bring eatables from the hotel and she had been made her to wait in the canteen. While the complainant has returned to that canteen, founds that the victim girl aged about 8 years was missing. Subsequently, the complainant had filed a missing complaint before the respondent police. After registering the crime against the accused, the police are made search and traced the accused so also the victim. The victim being a student by studying in first standard and she 7 has lured by the accused by providing chocolate in a bakery and taken her to Garden area and made her to assault and also fondled over her private parts and the same has been reflected in a statement given by the victim during the course of investigation before the Investigating Officer and the same is in conformity with the statement of victim which has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., by the concerned Magistrate. CWs.8 and 9 have been secured by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation as recorded their statement, wherein CW.8, has stated in his statement relating to the videography and also seized the CD in the panchanama. CW.10, is also being the eyewitness for the prosecution relating to the offence which lugged against the accused. CW.11 and CW.12 are the eyewitness for the prosecution. These witnesses have been stated in their statement before the Investigating Officer which is conformity with the allegation made in the complaint as well as statement said to be given by the victim during the course of investigation and so also the statement given under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. CWs.2 and 3 being the pancha witnesses have 8 been secured by the Investigating Officer, in their presence the spot panchanama has been conducted and the same has been shown by the victim who is aged about 8 years and also being a student studying in first standard and the same has been reflected in the charge sheet which is laid by the Investigating Officer before the concerned Court, where the accused is required to facing of trial for the alleged offences under Sections 323, 354(A), 363 of IPC, besides Section 10 of POCSO Act 2012, for having to the involvement of the accused and also for committing the alleged offences against the victim who is aged about 8 years is concerned, it is said that there is a prima facie case against the accused and mens rea attributable to the accused for the alleged offences, if bail is granted in such an heinous offence, there shall be an adverse impact on the society. Looking to the totality of facts and circumstance of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused is not deserving for bail. Consequently the bail petitioner is liable to be rejected.
7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: 9
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE msr