Allowed

Mr. Janappa S/O Raju Koujalagi Alias Girennavar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Sept 2023CRL.P/101639/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the accused petitioner in a case involving kidnapping and sexual assault on a minor under IPC and POCSO sections. The Court imposed strict conditions to prevent witness tampering and contact with the victim.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to executing a bond of Rs.1 lacs with two sureties, prohibiting contact with the prosecutrix, and not tampering with witnesses.

Mr. Janappa S/O Raju Koujalagi Alias… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101639 OF 2023

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. JANAPPA, S/O RAJU KOUJALAGI @ GIRENNAVAR, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: KOUJALAGI, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591218. (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD, THROUGH KULGOD POLICE KULGOD, TAL: MUDALAGI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591312.

¶13

CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANIDate: 2023.09.0513:04:12 +0530

¶14

BHIMASHI S/O. PANDAPPA METRI R/O: AMBEDKAR GALLI, KAUJALAGI, TAL: MUDALAGI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591312.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL AND PETITIONER/ACCUSED MAY BE ENLARGED ON BAIL IN KULGOD P.S. CR.NO. 156/2022 FOR OFFENSES U/SEC. 363, 376(1), 376(n) OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCE ACT

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶20

2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-1.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is by the sole accused seeking bail in Crime No.156/2022 of Kulgod Police Station for the offences punishable U/sec. 363, 376(1), 376(n) IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶24

In support of his petition, petitioner has contended that the complaint is false, misconceived and based on suppressed material facts. He has not committed the alleged offences. Petitioner was in love with the prosecutrix. This fact is forthcoming in her statement u/sec.164 Cr.P.C. As per the medical evidence, her age is in between 17-18 years and no external injuries were found on her person. Petitioner is aged 23 years. He was arrested on 12.06.2023 and since then he is in judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet is

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶26

filed and as such, his continued presence in custody for the purpose of investigation is not required. He is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and prays to allow the petition.

¶27

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.1/State. Notice is duly served on respondent No.2/complainant. He has appeared before the Court and learned HCGP submits that he has instructed her to represent him.

¶28

Learned HCGP submitted oral objections stating that as on the date of incident, prosecutrix was aged 17 years. She was studying in Government College, Koujalagi in 2^nd PU Commerce. After coming to know that petitioner

¶29

was after the prosecutrix, complainant warned him saying that prosecutrix is still a minor. In this background on 23.12.2022 at 10.30 p.m. prosecutrix went outside the house. Observing the same, complainant followed her and found petitioner taking her away on his motorcycle.

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶31

Though complainant tried to stop them, he could not. In this regard, he lodged the complaint.

¶32

4.1 During investigation, both the petitioner and

¶33

prosecutrix were secured. They are subjected to medical examination. After completing detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed. As per the school record, the date of birth of the prosecutrix is 20.12.2005 and as on the date of incident, she was a minor. The medical evidence reveal that she has been sexually assaulted by the petitioner. The prosecutrix has also given statement before the Magistrate which corroborate with the case of the prosecution. If released on bail, there is likelihood of petitioner threatening or tampering with the witnesses. Looking to the gravity of the offence, he may also abscond and prays to reject the petition.

¶34

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶35

As evident from the material placed on record,

¶36

the date of birth of the prosecutrix is 20.12.2005 and as on the date of incident, she was aged 17 years. Finding his

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶38

unwarranted advances towards the prosecutrix, her father had warned him saying that she is still minor and he should not go after her. However on 23.12.2022 at 10.00 p.m., petitioner has enticed the prosecutrix away from her legal guardian and took her to the house of her maternal uncle. They have allowed them to stay during night and on

¶39

the next day, both of them have gone to the house of grandfather of the prosecutrix. During their stay in the respective houses, petitioner committed sexual assault on the prosecutrix. However her grandfather brought both the petitioner and prosecutrix to Navalgund Police Station.

¶40

From there they were sent to Kulgod Police Station. Petitioner was arrested on 26.12.2022 and since then he is in judicial custody.

¶41

Both petitioner and prosecutrix are subjected to medical examination which reveal that the prosecutrix is sexually assaulted. After completing the investigation, charge sheet is filed against the petitioner for the offences punishable u/sec. 363, 376(1), 376(n) IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. Since the investigation is completed

¶42

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶43

and charge sheet is filed, the custodial presence of the petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. Though the apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner may threaten and tamper with the witnesses is well founded, the same may be overcome by imposing stringent conditions.

¶44

For the above reasons, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner is entitled for bail subject to conditions and accordingly, the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused is

¶47

released on bail in Crime No.156/2022 of Kulgod Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376(1), 376(n) IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, subject to following:

¶48

CONDITIONS

¶49

a) The petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

¶50

with two sureties for the like-sum.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10033 CRL.P No. 101639 of 2023

¶53

b) Petitioner/accused shall furnish his residential address proof and shall inform the investigating officer/Court if there is any change in the address.

¶54

c) Petitioner/accused shall not contact the prosecutrix either in person or otherwise.

¶55

d) Petitioner/accused shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

¶56

e) Petitioner/accused shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶57

f) Petitioner/accused shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

CLK

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

Mr. Janappa S/O Raju Koujalagi Alias Girennavar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Janappa S/O Raju Koujalagi Alias Girennavar 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

Mr Charles Harry Vs Sri Praveen Jain

Sri. Shankar B S, Vs Sri. K N Parthasarathy

Sri. Rajappa S/O Hanamapap Bhajantri Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Mahadev S/O. Basappa Savadi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Karinagappa S/O Gundumunagu Sannirappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Laxman Ramu Pujari Vs the State of Karnataka