Allowed

Jagadeesh v. the State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC6 Oct 2023CRL.P/7076/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail petition of an accused facing charges of kidnapping, POCSO, and child marriage. The court held that the victim's statement suggesting voluntary travel negated the likelihood of kidnapping, warranting bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to execution of personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, regular appearance in court, and restriction on tampering with witnesses.

Jagadeesh Vs the State of Karnataka by — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7076 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

JAGADEESH, S/O SHEKHAR @ CHANDRASHEKAR (IN THE CHARGE SHEET PETITIONERS NAME IS MENTIONED AS JAGADISHA S.), AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR, R/O THALALURU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN - 573 103.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. P.B. UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R.B. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ARASIKERE TOWN POLICE STATION, ARASIKERE SUB-DIVISION, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103.

¶14

(REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001).

¶15

DHORE, S/O KRISHNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶18

OCC: LABORER, R/O VITALAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN - 573 103.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1; R2 - SERVED)

¶21

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.240/2023 (CR.NO.50/2023) OF ARASIKERE TOWN P.S., HASSAN DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 363 OF IPC AND SEC.8,17 OF POCSO ACT AND SEC.9 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1 AT HASSAN.

¶22

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

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Accused in Special Case No.240/2023 pending before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1 at Hassan arising out of Crime No.50/2023 registered by Arasikere Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' for short), Sections 8 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act' for short) and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) is before this Court seeking regular bail.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

On the complaint of Dhore S/o. Krishnegowda dated

¶29

01.03.2023, FIR in Crime No.35/2023 was registered by Arasikere Rural Police Station against unknown persons for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. Subsequently, the said FIR was transferred on the report of the Sub-Inspector of Police, Arasikere Rural Police Station to Arsikere Town Police Station and FIR was registered in Crime No.50/2023 for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC.

¶30

During the course of investigation in the case, the petitioner was arrested on 09.03.2023. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner's bail application filed before the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1 at Hassan in Special Case No.240/2023 was rejected on 18.07.2023. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated

¶32

the grounds urged in the petition submits that the charge sheet has been filed only for the offences under Sections 8 and 17 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner is in custody since 09.03.2023. The petitioner and the victim girl were in love and she had

¶33

¶34

NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶35

voluntarily accompanied the petitioner accordingly, prays to allow the petition.

¶36

Learned HCGP has opposed the bail application and prays to dismiss the petition.

¶37

The charge sheet material would go to show that

¶38

the petitioner and the victim girl were in love. The complainant, who is the father of the victim girl had approached the police on 01.03.2023 and lodged a complaint stating that his minor daughter was missing from 28.02.2023 onwards.

¶39

During the course of investigation in the said case,

¶40

the minor girl was produced before the police station by her mother. The statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the victim girl was recorded by the jurisdictional Magistrate on 31.03.2023. In her statement, the victim girl has stated that on 28.02.2023, she had accompanied the petitioner with whom she was in love and traveled in a bus initially to Tumakuru from Arasikere and thereafter from Tumakuru they had traveled to Bengaluru and in Bengaluru, they had stayed in the house of Manjula, who is the sister of petitioner's friend. In the said house, they had stayed for two days and thereafter on

¶41

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶42

03.03.2023, petitioner and the minor girl had got married. Subsequently, the petitioner had contacted his brother - Arun after he came to know about the complaint lodged. Thereafter, petitioner brought back the victim girl and left her in her house. The mother of the victim girl had subsequently produced the victim girl before the police. In her statement recorded before the jurisdictional Magistrate, the victim girl has not made any allegation of sexual assault on her by the petitioner. It is under these circumstances, only Sections 8 and 17 of the POCSO Act have been invoked against the petitioner. Investigation in the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. Considering the statement of the victim girl, it becomes highly doubtful that the petitioner had kidnapped her. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:

¶43

O R D E R

¶44

The petition is allowed .

¶45

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Special Case No.240/2023 pending before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1 at Hassan arising out of

¶46

¶47

NC: 2023:KHC:36262 CRL.P No. 7076 of 2023

¶48

Crime No.50/2023 registered at Arasikere Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 363 of IPC, under Sections 8 and 17 of POCSO Act and under Section 9 of the Act, subject to the following conditions:

¶49

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

¶50

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶51

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶52

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

¶54

VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28 CT:SNN

Jagadeesh v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagadeesh 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

Chetan @ Shivu @ Kariya Chetu Vs State of Karnataka

Sri P Poorna Chandra Rao Vs State of Karnataka by

Kripa Vaibhav C Vs the State of Karnataka by

Santhosh M Vs State of Karnataka by

C. Srinivasachari Vs the State of Karnataka

Hemanth Kumar Vs State of Karnataka by