Allowed

Venkatesh S/O. Hanumantappa Korawar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Aug 2014CRL.P/101043/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of kidnapping, sexual assault on a minor, and child marriage. The court noted that while the initial victim was a minor, a child was born to them, and the parents proposed remarriage, necessitating bail for the child's sake.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed anticipatory bail subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000, not leaving jurisdiction, cooperating in investigation, and not tampering with witnesses.

Venkatesh S/O. Hanumantappa Korawar Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.101043/2014

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VENKATESH S/O. HANUMANTAPPA KORAWAR AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE R/O. IST CROSS, SHANTINIKETAN COLONY, GANGADHAR NAGAR, HUBLI

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. R B CONTRACTOR, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHIRALKOPPA POLICE R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HCGP)

¶15

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN SHRALKOPPA P.S. CRIME NO.147/2014 U/S 448, 376 (2)(H)(I)(N), 506 OF IPC AND ALSO U/S. 8, 12 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND SEC. 4 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT, 1929.

¶17

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.147/2014 registered by the Shiralkoppa Police for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 376(2)(h)(i)(n), 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 8 and 2 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(‘POCSO Act’ for short) and Section 4 of the Prevention of Child Marriage Act, 1929, is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

¶20

One Sri. Manjappa, S/o. Shanthappa has

¶21

lodged a complaint stating that, the victim girl

¶22

¶23

Sujata is his daughter and she was aged about 16 years as on the date of the offence and she was prosecuting SSLC. It is alleged that, on 27.04.2014, when the complainant returned home, he did not find his daughter. On search in his relatives’ house, he did not get any clue. Later, he came to know through some persons that on 05.05.2014, his daughter was seen in the company of Venkatesh (accused). Therefore, he lodged a complaint against the accused alleged the offence of kidnapping. Subsequently, the victim girl was traced and she has given her statement stating that she was taken away by the accused to different places and assuring her that they would become couple in future, he has committed sexual assault against her. Based on her statement, offences under Sections 448, 376(2) (h) (i) (n) of Indian Penal Code, Sections 8 and 12 of the

¶24

¶25

POCSO Act and Section 4 of the Prevention of Child Marriage Act have been included.

¶26

The learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶27

submitted that this case does not fall under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, but will fall under the exceptions of Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. He is submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence of kidnapping. In fact the petitioner married the daughter of the complainant and now she is the wife of the accused and has also given birth to his child. It is submitted that the statement recorded by the police is not under her free will. In order to fortify his submission, the learned Counsel referred to the Habeas Corpus petition filed before this Court in WP (HC) No.100012/2014, which was filed by the mother of the victim girl seeking production of her daughter. Now the parents of

¶28

¶29

the victim girl are proposing to marry their daughter for the second time and the child born to their daughter has been kept in the State Child Care Centre. It is further submitted that, in order to prevent the parents from marrying their daughter for the second time, the accused has filed O.S.No.14/2014 before the Principal Family Court, Hubli, which case is still pending. Under these circumstances, if the petitioner is denied bail, there is possibility of marrying his wife with someone else and it would end up in causing hardship to the petitioner and the child born to them may become orphan. Hence, the learned Counsel for the petitioner seek to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶30

The learned Counsel for the respondentState filed statement of objections and opposes grant of anticipatory bail. He submitted that this

¶31

¶32

case squarely falls under Section 376 (2) (h) (i) (n) of the Indian Penal Code and the statement of the victim dated 25.05.2014 reveals that the petitioner has committed the offence about eight months ago, that means to say when she was undisputedly minor, by taking her date of birth as 31.05.1998. Hence he submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶33

I have heard both the Counsel and perused the records.

¶34

On perusal of the complaint and also the statement of the victim girl, it is seen that as on the date of marriage, the victim was minor. But now the situation is entirely different. The victim girl became the mother by giving birth to a child. The child is in the custody of the Child Care Centre run by the State. The records also reveal

¶35

¶36

that the parents of the victim girl are proposing to marry their daughter for the second time.

¶37

Under the circumstances, though the

¶38

gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner is severe and the petitioner is liable to be punished, but in the interest of victim and also the child, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted with the benefit of anticipatory bail. Hence I pass the following:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

The petition is allowed. In the event of the arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.147/2014, he shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶41