Allowed

Santhosh @ Appu v. the State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC22 Jul 2021CRL.P/93/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a criminal petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by an accused convicted of offences under IPC and POCSO Act involving a minor victim who gave birth. The court emphasized the victims maturity and consent while imposing strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner/accused released on bail subject to execution of personal bond with sureties, not tampering with witnesses, not indulging in similar offences, taking trial without delay, not leaving jurisd

Santhosh @ Appu Vs the State of Karnataka by — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.93/2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SANTHOSH @ APPU S/O LATE DANDAPAANI, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1ST MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, BANGARAPPANAGARA, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGARA, BANGALORE-560098. … PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAJANNA B.C, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560098, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560001. … RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI.K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.123/2020 REGISTERED BY RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 363, 376 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4, 5(j)(ii), AND 6 OF POCSO ACT.

¶14

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS , THIS DAY THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting bail in Crime No.123/2020 registered by Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5(j)(ii), and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶19

and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Geetha the mother of the victim, registered a complaint on 17.6.2020 alleging that her daughter the victim girl, aged about 17 years used to go for the work and she came to know on 14.06.2020 that since three months, there is no menstruation of

¶21

¶22

her daughter. On enquiry, she has not revealed anything but later, came to know from her sister that the victim is pregnant. Hence, she was taken to Abhaya Nursing home and later to the Vani Vilas hospital/Victoria hospital and it was confirmed that she is pregnant of seven months and thereafter, it was revealed by the victim that the accused was the cause for the pregnant. Accordingly, a case was registered and the petitioner was arrested on 19.06.2020 and he was remanded to Judicial Custody. The investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed.

¶23

Upon hearing the arguments of learned

¶24

counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP and on perusal of the records, it shows that admittedly, the victim is aged more than 17 years and she became pregnant of seven months but she had not disclosed the same to anybody and later, when she was taken to

¶25

the hospital for medical checkup, the pregnant was confirmed of seven months, then the complaint was

¶26

¶27

registered against the petitioner and he was taken to custody. The investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Both the petitioner and victim have fell in love and they had sexual intercourse, of course by willingness and consent which is immaterial as she was below 18 years. Now, the victim has given birth to a female child which is about ten months, the petitioner is in custody for more than one year. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is ready to marry the victim and lead marital life as the victim also has attained majority age of 18 years. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and by imposing certain conditions, if the petitioner/accused is granted bail, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The criminal petition is allowed .

¶30

¶31

The trial Court is directed to release the petitioner/accused on bail in Crime No.123/2020 registered by Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5(j)(ii), and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

i) Petitioner shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

¶33

ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;

¶34

iii) He shall not indulge himself in similar offences strictly;

¶35

iv) He shall take the trial without causing any delay;

¶36

v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission; and

¶37

¶38

vi) He shall mark the attendance in the jurisdictional police station once in a month on every second day of English calendar month for a period of six months.

¶39

If any of the conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶40

SD/JUDGE

¶41

cbc

Santhosh @ Appu v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh @ Appu v. the State of Karnataka by

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

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mohammed Faraz Vs State of Karnataka

Mani @ Manikanta Vs the State of Karnataka

The State - through the Circle Vs Mr. Firoz Sheik

Srinivasa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Venkatesh D @ Onti Kai Venkatesh Vs the State by Siddapura Police Station