Dismissed

Santosh S/O Shivanand Jerakal v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Sept 2018CRL.P/101413/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by Santosh sought bail in a case involving offences under Sections 376 and POCSO. The High Court dismissed the petition as not a fit case for bail due to the gravity of the offence and eye-witness testimony.

What did the court decide?

Petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed and the accused has no bail.

Santosh S/O Shivanand Jerakal Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶2

DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101413 OF 2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SANTOSH S/O SHIVANAND JERAKAL AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: NEGLI PETH, GULEDAGUDDA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI P N HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND :

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY GULEDAGUDDA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.214/2018 (GULEDAGUDDA PS.CR.NO.84/2017) PENDING BEFORE II ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 376, 354(A), 511 OF IPC AND UNDER SEC.8, 12 AND 18 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012(POCSO).

¶16

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

¶17

: 2 :

¶18

CRL. P. NO.101413/2018

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Guledagudda Police have registered Crime No.84/2017 against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 511 of I.P.C. and Sections 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the Act’) on the basis of the complaint of one Prakash Angadi.

¶21

It is alleged that on 20.09.2017 at 3.45 p.m. the accused procured complainant’s minor daughter ‘X’ (for the purpose of confidentiality the victim is referred as ‘X’ hereafter) to his house luring her with chocolate and cool drinks and committed aggravated sexual assault on her. It is alleged that when the girl was not seen the parents went searching her and found the overt acts of the accused/petitioner and on seeing them the petitioner escaped.

¶22

The petitioner is arrested on 20.09.2017 and he is in judicial custody. Sri.P.N.Hosamane, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there

¶23

: 3 :

¶24

CRL. P. NO.101413/2018

¶25

are contradictions in the complaint and the statement of the girl before the Magistrate and the medical evidence does not indicate any sexual assault. Learned High Court Government Pleader contends that there is sufficient material against the petitioner.

¶26

The victim girl has spoken before the Magistrate regarding the sexual assault on her. The alleged contradictions namely whether girl informed the complainant about the incident or the complainant himself found the girl and the accused at the spot during the commission of the offence, are irrelevant at this stage.

¶27

Having regard to the gravity of the offence and the fact that this case is based on the eye-witnesses, this Court does not find it a fit case to exercise the discretion for grant of bail. Therefore, the petition is dismissed.

¶28

Sd/JUDGE

¶29

hnm

Santosh S/O Shivanand Jerakal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh S/O Shivanand Jerakal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hussainbasha S/O Abdulkareemsab Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Rama S/O Ningappa Pundekar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Nanaso @ Nanisha S/O Nemanna Chougale Vs the State of Karnataka

The Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Renuka S/O Onkarappa

Kalakappa S/O. Irappa Ryavanaki Vs the State of Karnataka

Malleshappa S/O Devappa Pawar Vs the State