Bail petition under Cr.P.C. 439 for rape and POCSO offences rejected. Court held no valid grounds for bail due to rupture of hymen and probable attempt to tamper with witnesses. Petition quashed.
Criminal petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G NIJAGANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101787/2019
BETWEEN:
BILAL SAIFNASAB JANGALI @ SHAIKH, AGE:22 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE, R/O UGAR B.K., TQ:ATHANI, DIST:BELAGAVI.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.HARSHAWARDHANA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAGWAD POLICE STATION, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN KAGWAD POLICE STATION CRIME NO.95/2019 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376, 341 & 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND ALSO UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in Kagwad P.S. Crime No.95/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 341 & 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and also under Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
had gone along with Ruksana to her aunt’s house. When the complainant went near the said house, door was closed and when she knocked the door, her daughter opened the door and started weeping, her
3
clothes were torn. On enquiry, she informed that the sister of the petitioner/accused took her to the said house and the petitioner/accused has committed rape forcibly and also threatened her that he would kill her if she does not cooperate. Immediately, some persons came to the spot the petitioner/accused was hiding in the corner of the said house. By looking at complainant and others, he fled away from the spot. On registering the case, the police have arrested the accused/petitioner on 7.7.2019. Since then, he is in judicial custody. The bail petition filed before the Sessions Court was rejected.
strenuously contended that the petitioner/accused has
4
been falsely implicated in this case with vindictive motive. There was a proposal by the parents of the girl prosecutrix to perform her marriage with the petitioner/accused. There are major contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix and parents of the prosecutrix. Even the medical evidence does not make out the case that the accused has committed the alleged offence. Due to detention, he has been put to great hardship. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
5
hymen was ruptured. In the event of granting bail, the petitioner is likely to tamper the prosecution witnesses and also cause threat to the parents of the prosecutrix. As such there are no valid grounds for granting bail.
averments, on 6.7.2019, when the complainant had gone in search of her daughter, she was found in the house where the accused was also there. The prosecutrix informed that she was taken there by the sister of the accused/petitioner and she was raped by the petitioner/accused. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner accused was caught by the complainant and others immediately after sexual act performed by him. As rightly contended by the learned HCGP, medical evidence discloses that hymen was ruptured. According to the charge sheet material and Transfer Certificate of the Prosecutrix made available before this Court, the age of the prosecutrix is about 13 years four
6
months and her date of birth is mentioned as 12.03.2006. As could be seen from the statement of
the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., she has clearly narrated about sexual act performed by the accused/petitioner.
prosecution records made available before this Court clearly goes to prove the complicity and involvement of the accused/petitioner in commission of the offence. The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event of granting bail, the petitioner/accused is likely to cause threat to the prosecutrix and her parents. The said apprehension cannot be ruled out.
there are no valid grounds made out for granting bail.
7
pass the following:
ORDER
Criminal Petition filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. is rejected.
Sd/JUDGE
JTR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused charged with rape under Sections 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the apprehension of tampering with witnesses and threatening the prosecutrix justifies rejection of bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
BILAL SAIFNASAB JANGALI @ SHAIKH
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
ASHOK G NIJAGANNAVAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
