Allowed

Ananda. M. v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Sept 2023CRL.P/6147/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants discretionary anticipatory bail to a petitioner accused under the POCSO Act and PMMA for alleged sexual assault on his minor wife. The court allowed bail noting the couple's marriage, a child born, the victim's positive statement in the court, and lack of specific allegations against the accused during her statement, subject to surety and cooperation conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed. Accused released on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety, condition of regular appearance in trial court, no tampering with witnesses, and cooperation until charge sheet.

Ananda. M. Vs State of Karnataka — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6147 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

ANANDA M C/O MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT MEDAHATTI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 108.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI NARESH KUMAR P.C, ADV.)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MALUR POLICE STATION MALUR, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶12

MRS XXXXX D/O SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRESENTATED BY HER FATHER NATURAL GUARDIAN SRI SRINIVAS R/AT PALYAKERE VILLAGE CHELURU HOBLI BAGEPALLI TALUK - 562 101 CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SMT. SOWMYA R, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.PC PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN CR.NO.221/2023 REGISTERED BY MALUR P.S. FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 9 OF CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT, SEC. 6 OF THE POCSO ACT 2012, AND SEC. 376(2)(n) OF IPC AND GRANT

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶18

SUCHY OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HONOURABLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Accused in Crime No.221/2023 registered by the Malur Police Station, Kolar district for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) Section 6 of Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and Section 9 of The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 is before this Court seeking regular bail.

¶22

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

¶23

On the basis of statement made by the victim girl dated 10.06.2023, FIR in Crime No.221/2023 was registered by Malur Police Station against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. In the complaint, it is averred that the complainant is aged about 17 years and she had studied up to I PUC. The complainant was acquainted with the petitioner, who is her distant relative and he had proposed to her to marry her.

¶24

However, the complainant had not agreed for the same since she was still a minor. On the basis of a complaint filed to the

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶26

Child Welfare Committee of Chikkaballapura, the complainant was summoned to the office for verification and she was asked to mark her attendance once in three months. Subsequently,

¶27

the complainant decided to marry the petitioner and on 13.11.2022, she had accompanied the petitioner and got married in a temple. Thereafter, she lived with the petitioner in his house at his village. In the month of April, 2023 when she visited the office of the Child Welfare Committee, after medical examination it was found that she was pregnant. Thereafter, the complainant had lodged a complaint which had resulted in registering FIR in Crime No.221/2023. Apprehending arrest in the said case, the petitioner had filed bail application in Crl.Misc.No.465/2023 before Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FTSC-I Kolar, which was dismissed on 23.06.2023. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the

¶29

grounds urged in the petition and submits that the petitioner and the victim girl are married. The complainant has not stated anything against the petitioner during the course of her Section 164 Cr.P.C, statement. He submits that the victim girl has delivered a baby on 29.08.2023. Therefore, presence of the

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶32

petitioner, who is her husband beside her is now required. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/ complainant endorsed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that at the instance of Child Welfare Committee members, a police complaint was lodged. The petitioner and the victim girl are married and the victim girl has now delivered a baby on 29.08.2023 and the entire hospital expenditures have been met by the family members of the petitioner.

¶34

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State has opposed the bail application. However, she does not dispute the fact that during the course of her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, the victim girl has not made any allegation against the petitioner.

¶35

From a reading of the complaint averments it is seen that the complainant has stated that she voluntarily had married the petitioner on 13.11.2022 in a temple at Doddakadathur village, Malur. Thereafter, they lived together in the house of the petitioner in his village. It is only subsequently

¶36

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶37

when she had gone to the Child Welfare Committee, on her medical examination it was revealed that she was pregnant and thereafter complaint was lodged. During the course of her Section 164 of Cr.P.C, statement, the victim girl has not made allegation as against the petitioner and she has stated that she is in love with the petitioner and she had married him. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 have stated that the victim girl has now delivered a baby on 29.08.2023. Considering the nature of case and also having regard to the statement made by the victim girl during the course of her Section 164 of Cr.P.C, statement, I am of the considered view that the petitioner's prayer for grant of discretionary relief of anticipatory bail is required to be answered affirmatively.

¶38

Accordingly, the petition is allowed . The respondent - Police or any other police in the State of Karnataka are directed to release the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.221/2023 registered by the Malur Police Station, Kolar district for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and Section 6 of Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act,

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:31586 CRL.P No. 6147 of 2023

¶41

2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and Section 9 of The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, subject to the following conditions:

¶42

a. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for

¶43

the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.

¶44

b. The petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.

¶45

c. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witness and he shall cooperate with the police for investigation and appear before them whenever called upon till filing of charge sheet.

¶46

SD/JUDGE

¶47

NMS

Ananda. M. v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ananda. M. 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

Sri Nagendra T Vs the State

Siddegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahammed Sabith Vs State of Karnataka

Aslam. C. a. Vs Union of India

Tirumurthy Vs State by Chennarayapatana P. S.

Bhagyamma Vs State of Karnataka