Dismissed

Prithviraj S K v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2022CRL.P/2457/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. sought regular bail for the petitioner accused of offences under IPC Section 376 and POCSO sections against a 3.5-year-old child. The High Court examined the evidence, including medical and FSL reports, and the nature of the offence against a minor.

What did the court decide?

The bail petition is rejected. The petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court after examination of the victim girl as well as the doctor.

Prithviraj S K Vs State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2457/2022

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

PRITHVIRAJ S K AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O K S KRISHNAMURTHY R/A NO 101, 2^ND CROSS NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE MARUTI LAYOUT, WEAVERS COLONY BANGALORE-560083

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI KESHAVA KUMAR B, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION KONANAKUNTE, BANGALORE-560076

¶13

SMT. KALPANA M AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS W/O MANJUNATH N NO.15, 2^ND CROSS NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE MARUTHI EXTENSION WEAVERS COLONY BENGALURU – 560 083

¶14

… RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1; R2- SERVED)

¶16

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.208/2021 OF KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 376 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 6, 5(M) OF POCSO ACT AND ETC.

¶18

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

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.208/2021 of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 6, 5(m) of POCSO Act.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶22

The factual matrix of the case is that this petitioner on 17.09.2021 at about 7.15 p.m., went to the house of CW1 and took the victim girl who is aged about 3½ years stating that he would play with her and took her to his house and subjected her for sexual act. Based on the complaint, the police have

¶23

¶24

registered the case and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶26

would submit that this petitioner is aged about 21 years and he is under the care of his parents and the medical evidence of the victim girl is clear that hymen is intact and there is no penetrative sexual act against the victim girl and this petitioner is in custody from last 8 months and investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed thus, there is no need of custodial trial hence, prayed to allow the petition.

¶27

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State would submit that this petitioner subjected the victim girl who is aged about 3½ years for sexual act and track pant of the victim girl was seized and sent to the FSL and FSL report also confirms the presence of seminal stains in the said pant and also on examination of the victim girl, white discharge also found in her private part, hence, it is clear that this petitioner subjected her for sexual act and in 164 statement, the victim girl reiterated with regard to the act of this petitioner

¶28

¶29

subjecting her for sexual act and hence, it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶30

Having heard the respective counsel appearing for

¶31

the parties and also on perusal of the material available on record it discloses that the victim girl is aged about 3½ years and also the statement of the mother of the victim girl is that this petitioner came and took the child with him stating that he would play with her but in 164 statement, the victim girl stated that he took her to his house and subjected for sexual act and the victim girl also examined on the very same day and found white discharge in the cloth of the victim and FSL report also confirms the presence of stains on the cloth of the victim and no

¶32

doubt, the medical evidence of the victim girl discloses that hymen is intact but the opinion of the doctor is that the victim girl was probably subjected for sexual act. When such material available on record, it is an offence against a child who is aged about 3½ years hence, it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that the petitioner is aged about 21 years

¶33

¶34

and also there is a chances of reformation and same can be considered during the course of trial and not at this stage.

¶35

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶36

following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The bail petition is rejected. The petitioner is

¶39

at liberty to approach this Court after examination of

¶40

the victim girl as well as the doctor.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

Prithviraj S K v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prithviraj S K v. 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

Nagesh G C @ Nagesh Reddy Vs State by

Lawrence @ a. Anand Vs State of Karnataka

Veerabhadra Swamy S @ Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Nithin Subbaiah B C Vs the State of Karnataka

Nayazulla Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Shankara M Vs State of Karnataka