Allowed

Ganesha v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC9 Nov 2023CRL.P/7332/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Karnataka allowed bail for the petitioner charged under IPC and POCSO Act. The Court found the parties were related and intended to marry, noting a lack of serious allegations from the victim and the petitioner's clean record, thereby granting regular bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties for the same amount, subject to standard conditions including regular appearance and no tampering with witnesses.

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7332 OF 2023

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

GANESHA S/O UYYANDE, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT HAKKIPIKKI COLONY, BANNERGHATTA POST, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560105 (ACCUSED NO 1 IS IN JC)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJA BARIKARA., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY Location: HIGH SHO, RAMANAGARA WOMEN PS, COURT OF RAMANAGARA, KARNATAKA REPTD BY GOVT PLEADER, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU 560001

¶14

CHIKKATHIMAIAH S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT KUNAMUDDANAHALLI VILLAGE, BILAGUMBA POST, KUTAGAL HOBLI,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

RAMANAGARA-562159

¶19

(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY. R, HCGP FOR R1 V/O DT. 8/11/23 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.27/2023 REGISTERED BY RAMANAGARA WOMEN POLICE STATION, RAMANAGARA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 363, 376(N), 114 OF IPC AND SECTION 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN SPL.C.C.NO.65/2023 AND ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Accused in Spl.C.C.No.65/2023 pending before the Court of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, arising out of Crime No.27/2023 registered by Ramanagara Women Police Station, Ramanagara for the offence punishable under Section 363, 376(N), 114 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, is before this court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶24

Respondent No.2/defacto complainant who is

¶25

served in the matter has remained unrepresented.

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

On the basis of compliant dated 25.02.2023

¶29

lodged by the 2^nd respondent who is the father of the victim girl, FIR in Crime No.27/2023 was registered by the Women Police Station Ramanagara against the petitioner and another for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 26.02.2023. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner’s bail application filed before the trial court in Crl.Misc.No.509/2023 was dismissed on 19.07.2023.

¶30

Therefore the petitioner is before this court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the averments in the petition submits that the petitioner and the victim girl are in love. The victim is daughter of petitioner’s maternal uncle. The complainant has filed an affidavit before the trial court stating that the marriage of the victim with the petitioner will be performed by the family members after she attains the age of majority. Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶32

¶33

NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶34

submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he

¶35

is in custody from 27.02.2023. Accordingly he prays to

¶36

allow the petition.

¶37

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the bail

¶38

petition.

¶39

The material on record would go to show that the petitioner and the victim girl are closely related and they were in love. The complainant has filed an affidavit before the trial court which would reveal that his daughter was love with the petitioner and since there was some

¶40

family dispute between the two families he had filed a compliant against the petitioner and thereafter at the intervention of the well wishers and close relatives, the parties have now decided to get the complainant’s daughter married to the petitioner after she attains the age of majority. Even otherwise the material on record would go to show that the victim girl has not made any serious allegations against the petitioner and on the other

¶41

hand she has stated that she was in love with the petitioner. The petitioner who has no criminal antecedents

¶42

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶43

is in custody from 27.02.2023. The investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail.

¶44

The petition is allowed . The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.C.No.65/2023 pending before the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, arising out of Crime No.27/2023 registered by Ramanagara Women Police Station, Ramanagara for the offence punishable under Section 363, 376(N), 114 of

¶45

IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions:

¶46

(a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a

¶47

sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

¶48

(b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all

¶49

the dates of hearing before the Trial Court

¶50

unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:40147 CRL.P No. 7332 of 2023

¶53

¶54

(d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶55

(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 of.

¶56

Sd/JUDGE

¶57

KLY CT: JL

Ganesha v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesha 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

Munnela Gopinath @ Arjun Vs State by Subramanyapura

Sri Nagaraja R Vs State of Karnataka

Venkatesha Vs State of Karnataka

Ganesh R Vs State of Karnataka

Khanaram Vs the State of Karnataka

Nanjesh C S @ Nanjesh Gouda Vs the State of Karnataka