Allowed

Clement George. J v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC26 Oct 2023CRL.P/5459/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner, who was in custody under multiple offences including those against children. The court granted bail subject to executing a bond, appearing regularly, and not threatening witnesses or leaving the jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was enlarged on bail by executing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, subject to appearance, non-tampering with witnesses, and staying within the jurisdiction.

Clement George. J Vs State of Karnataka by — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5459 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

CLEMENT GEORGE .J S/O. LATE JOHN BOSCO AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.06, 4^TH CROSS, KCHS LAYOUT, NEAR AMMA SCHOOL, ULLAL MAIN ROAD, JNANABHARATHI, BENGALURU–560056. ... PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI M.R.C. MANOHAR, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY JNANABHARATHI PS, BANGALORE CITY REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE–560001.

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SUJATHA W/O. ANAND KUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/A NO.3, 4^TH CROSS, MAHADESHWARA NAGAR, MAIN ROAD, MARUTI NAGAR, HEROHALLI, BANGALORE–560091. ... RESPONDENTS

¶13

(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R., HCGP FOR R-1; V/O. DATED 04/10/2023, NOTICE TO R-2 HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER IN CR.NO.97/2023 OF JNANABHARATHI P.S., BANGALORE, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 4 & 21 OF THE POSCO ACT & SECTION 376 OF IPC, AND THE CASE IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILES OF FTSC-V, BENGALURU.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶17

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

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Accused No.1 in Special C.C. No.1709/2023 pending on the file of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, registered by Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B) of the IPC, Sections 8, 10 and 21 of the POCSO Act and Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is before this Court seeking bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Based on the complaint dated 12.05.2023

¶22

lodged by Sujatha, FIR in Crime No.97/2023 was registered by Jnanabharathi Police Station against Lakshmi and others for the offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 21 of POCSO Act. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 15.05.2023. The investigation in the case is complete and

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶24

charge-sheet has been filed for the aforesaid offences and the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.1 in the charge-sheet. His bail application filed before the Court of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge-FTSC-V, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc. No.4755/2023 was dismissed on 12.06.2023. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner was not found in the FIR and charge sheet is now filed for the offence punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B) of IPC, Sections 8, 10 and 21 of the POCSO Act and Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The maximum punishment for the said offences is seven years imprisonment. The petitioner is in custody from 15.05.2023, investigation in the case is complete and charge-sheet has been filed. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶26

Per contra , learned HCGP seriously opposed the

¶27

bail application. He submits that the petitioner has

¶28

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶29

misused his position and committed alleged offences. He also submits that accused No.2, who is wife of the petitioner is absconding. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶30

The complainant-Sujatha, who is the mother of victim girl, approached the jurisdictional police on 12.05.2023 and lodged a complaint, which resulted in registering the FIR in Crime No.97/2023 against Lakshmi and others. The petitioner was not arrayed as accused in the FIR. During the course of the investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 15.05.2023, investigation in the case is completed and the charge-sheet has been filed. As per the charge-sheet allegations, the petitioner, along with accused Nos.2 and 3, had taken a premises on rent within the jurisdiction of Jnanabharathi Police Station in the year 2018 and had started a children's home in the name of Swavalambhi Trust/Children’s Home and admitted about 20 girls in the said home. It is alleged that the accused persons did not obtain necessary licence and permission

¶31

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶32

from the competent authority for establishing the children’s home. It is alleged in the charge-sheet that the petitioner, after consuming alcohol, was misbehaving with the girls, who were admitted to the children's home. The victim girl, who was admitted in the children’s home, had missed monthly menstrual period and this was brought to the notice of accused Nos.2 and 3 and she also informed about the act of accused No.1. Therefore, accused Nos.2 and 3 allegedly took the victim girl to the hospital for a medical checkup and thereafter, they gave her raw papaya to eat and subsequently, she had menstruated. The allegations in the charge-sheet against the petitioner are that he misbehaved with the victim girl and other girls who were admitted in the children’s home by inappropriately touching and kissing them. Therefore, charge-sheet has been filed against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B) of IPC, Sections 8, 10 and 21 of the POCSO Act and Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The maximum punishment for the said offences is

¶33

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶34

imprisonment for seven years. The petitioner is in custody from 15.05.2023. The investigation in the case is completed and the charge-sheet has been filed and the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal antecedents. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the prayer for regular bail needs to be allowed. Accordingly, the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.97/2023 registered by Jnanabharathi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B) of IPC, Sections 8, 10 and 21 of the POCSO Act and Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, subject to the following conditions:

¶37

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶38

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:37972 CRL.P No. 5459 of 2023

¶39

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates

¶40

of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶41

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten

¶42

or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶43

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in

¶44

future;

¶45

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

MBM

Clement George. J v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Clement George. J v. 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

Raju a K a Rajashekar Vs State by

Kaliya Jana, Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sri. Shashikumar @ Shashkumar @ Kapi Vs State of Karnataka

Surendra Thapa Vs the State of Karnataka

Shivaraju @ Kulla Shivaraju Vs the State of Karnataka by

Yogananda @ Yoga S v Vs State of Karnataka by