Dismissed

Shanu S/O. Rajesab Mannanayak v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2020CRL.P/101228/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court of Karnataka dismissed a bail petition filed by an accused charged with kidnapping and sexual assault under IPC and POCSO. The court held that releasing the accused would hinder the recording of the minor victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and deferred consideration of bail pending such recording.

What did the court decide?

Bail petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to approach court after victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is recorded.

Shanu S/O. Rajesab Mannanayak Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶5

CRL.P. NO.101228 OF 2020

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHANU S/O RAJESAB MANNANAYAK AGE:20 YEARS,OCC:CABAL WORK, R/O MANDYAL, TQ & DIST:DHARWAD.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. T.R. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HUBBALLI KESHWAPUR P.S. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SMT. SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP)

¶14

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C.PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL. SC. NO.16/2020 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE, DHARWAD ARISING OUT OF HUBBALLI KESHWAPUR P.S. CRIME NO.37/2020 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 363 AND 376 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 6 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.37/2020 of Keshwapur Police Station. Initially, on the complaint lodged by the mother of the victim girl, aforesaid case was registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. The victim girl was secured on 12.5.2020 and her statement was recorded. Accused came to be arrested on 9.6.2020. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

¶19

It is alleged in the complaint that on 25.4.2020, the accused kidnapped the minor daughter of the complainant, aged about 17 years and kept her in a house at Mandyal till

¶20

¶21

12.5.2020 and committed penetrative sexual assault on her.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶23

submits that the victim girl has given different version in her statements recorded during the course of investigation. He submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 9.6.2020. Now, charge sheet is filed. Hence, he seeks to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶24

Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently opposed grant of bail to the petitioner and sought to reject the petition.

¶25

Victim is a minor. Her statement

¶26

recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. reveals that between 25.4.2020 and 12.05.2020, the

¶27

¶28

petitioner has forcibly committed penetrative sexual assault on her. The learned HCGP submits that the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is yet to be recorded. Hence, I am of the view that, at this stage, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, the same will be a hindrance for the victim to give her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court after recording of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

¶29

With the above observation, petition is

¶30

dismissed.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

JTR

Shanu S/O. Rajesab Mannanayak v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanu S/O. Rajesab Mannanayak 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

Basappa Kareppa Chandargi, Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.Shantha Kumara S @ S. Shanthakumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Venkatalakshmi W/O Late Mallikarjun Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Jayalakshmi K.B. W/O Late Hanumanthappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Veeresh S/O Prakash Sotnal Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Malleshappa G So Late Basavanagouda Vs the State of Karnataka