Allowed

Ashif Alias Maktumahusen S/O Lalsab Alias Sannlalsab Killedar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Feb 2024CRL.P/100080/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka granted regular bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving offences under IPC 376(2)(n) and POCSO. The court noted the victim's statement indicated voluntary relation and ordered strict bail conditions including a stay in the Nargund taluk.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to personal bond, regular attendance, non-tampering with witnesses, and prohibition from entering Nargund taluk or contacting the victim.

Ashif Alias Maktumahusen S/O Lalsab Alias… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100080 OF 2024 (439)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

ASHIF @ MAKTUMAHUSEN S/O. LALSAB @ SANNLALSAB KILLEDAR, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC. PAINTING WORK, R/O. SHIDDANBHAVI ONI, NARAGUND, TQ. NARAGUND, DIST. GADAG, PIN-582207.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

¶13

THROUGH NARAGUND POLICE STATION. PIN-582207.

¶14

Digitally VIJAYALAXMI signed by M BHAT VIJAYALAXMI M BHAT

¶15

GANGAVVA W/O. GANGAPPA KALLIMANI, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SOMAPUR ONI, NARAGUND, DIST. GADAG. PIN-582207.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI S.C.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO. 161/2023 REGISTERED BY THE NARGUND POLICE STATION PENDING BEFORE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE GADAG IN S.C.NO. 95/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 363, 376(2)(n) OF IPC AND SEC. 4 AND 6 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Accused in S.C.No.95/2023 pending before the

¶24

Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, arising out of Crime No.161/2023 registered by Nargund Police Station, Gadag district, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶26

FIR in Crime No.161/2023 was registered by Nargund Police Station, Gadag district, for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of Indian Penal Code against unknown persons on the basis of the complaint lodged by Gangavva W/o Gagappa Kallimani. In the complaint, it is averred that complainant’s minor daughter aged about 16 years 9 months who was studying in I PUC had gone to her school on 25.09.2023 at about 11.45 am,

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶28

but had not returned home thereafter. Efforts made by the complainant to trace her had failed and therefore, on 27.09.2023 she had filed complaint which had resulted in registering FIR in Crime No.161/2023.

¶29

During the course of investigation, the petitioner and victim girl were traced together on 04.10.2023 and they were brought back. The petitioner was produced before the jurisdictional Court and remanded to judicial custody. The girl was subjected to medical examination and her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was thereafter recorded before the jurisdiction Magistrate on 10.10.2023. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet is filed. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the Trial Court in S.C.No.95/2023 was rejected on 21.12.2023. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the petitioner and the victim girl were in love. The

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶32

petitioner is in custody from 05.10.2023. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The victim girl has not made any serious allegation against the petitioner during the course of her Section 164 of Cr.P.C. statement recorded before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the bail application. She submits that the victim was minor as on the date of the incident and her consent does not matter. She submits that the petitioner is the neighbourer of the complainant and the victim and therefore, there are chances of he tampering the prosecution witnesses. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the petition.

¶34

FIR in Crime No.161/2023 was initially registered against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC on basis of the complaint lodged by second respondent herein. During the course of investigation, the petitioner and the victim

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶36

girl who was aged about 16 years 9 months were traced together on 04.10.2023 in the house of petitioner’s friend Sameer. The victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the jurisdictional Magistrate has stated that she and the petitioner were in love for the last one and half years. On 25.09.2023 she had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner in his motorbike and they had together gone to the house petitioner’s friend Sameer and stayed there. She had stated that while she so stayed in the house of Sameer, she had sexual intercourse with the petitioner voluntarily and petitioner had not forced her for

¶37

the same. She has also stated that while they were staying in the house of Sameer, police came to the said house and brought them back and the case was registered only on the basis of the complaint of her mother.

¶38

From a perusal of the statement made by the

¶39

victim girl before the jurisdictional Magistrate, it is seen that no serious allegations are made by her against the petitioner and on the other hand, she has stated that she

¶40

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶41

was in love with the petitioner and she had voluntarily accompanied him and stayed together for a period of nearly 9 days in the house of Sameer. Undisputedly, the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is a agricultural coolie by avocation. The investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The charge sheet allegation against the petitioner is required to be proved in a full pledged trial. Apprehension of the leaned HCGP can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions on the petitioner. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the prayer made by the petitioner for regular bail is required to be answered in the affirmative. Accordingly, the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

Petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.95/2023 pending before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, arising out of Crime No.161/2023 registered by Nargund Police Station, Gadag district, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code and

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2426 CRL.P No. 100080 of 2024

¶46

Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:

¶47

i. The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶48

ii. The petitioner shall attend Trial Court regularly on all dates of hearing unless his appearance is exempted by the Trial Court for valid reasons.

¶49

iii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he shall not enter Nargund taluk or try to contact the victim girl till the case against him is disposed of.

¶50

iv. The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future.

¶51

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

¶52

Sd/JUDGE

¶53

VMB

Ashif Alias Maktumahusen S/O Lalsab Alias Sannlalsab Killedar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashif Alias Maktumahusen S/O Lalsab Alias Sannlalsab Killedar 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

Shri Bharaaamalingappa Alias Bharamu S/O Ningappa Myageri Vs the State of Karnataka

Suresh S/O Kotrappa Nagappanavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Mahadev Channappa Hattarki Vs the State of Karnataka

Ganapati Dyaneshwar Sugate Alias Gondhali S/O Dyaneshwar Sugate Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Athamanand Alias Atma S/O. Basavarj Patat Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Mahaveer S/O. Neminath Solapure, Vs the State of Karnataka