Allowed

Sri Paramesh M C S/O Late Chikkanna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2024CRL.P/4019/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the sole accused in a case under Section 363 IPC and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act. Medical report showed no evidence of physical violence and investigation was complete with charge sheet filed; the court allowed the petition and enlarged the petitioner on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in Crime No.48/2024 on bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions.

Sri Paramesh M C S/O Late Chikkanna Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:19494 CRL.P No. 4019 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4019 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. PARAMESH M.C S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT MALAMACHALAKUNTE VILLAGE, CHELUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 117.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRADEEP H.S, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CHELUR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

UMESH S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT MALAMACHALAKUNTE VILLAGE, CHELUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 117.

¶15

(BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; R2 - SERVED)

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.48/2024 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 363 OF IPC AND SEC. 8 AND 12 OF THE POCSO ACT, 2012 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 CHELUR POLICE STATION, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC1), TUMAKURU.

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:19494 CRL.P No. 4019 of 2024

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., in Crime No.48/2024 of Chelur Police Station, pending on the file of the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Tumakuru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Sections 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO') on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Sri. Umesh.

¶22

Heard Sri. Pradeep H.S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.M.R.Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶23

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶24

“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶25

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:19494 CRL.P No. 4019 of 2024

¶27

R E A S O N S

¶28

The petitioner being the sole accused is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on 04.03.2024. Initially the father of the victim girl-aged about 16 years, filed the missing complaint. The victim girl was found missing on 28.02.2024. She was rescued on 03.03.2024. Statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was recorded by the learned Magistrate, wherein she has stated that she had gone with the petitioner and she was forcibly married and the petitioner tried to commit penetrative sexual assault. The opinion of the medical officer who examined the victim girl discloses that there is no evidence of physical violence and that the sexual assault may or may not have occurred. The investigation is completed and the charge sheet is filed. The prosecution has invoked only Section 363 of IPC and Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶29

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:19494 CRL.P No. 4019 of 2024

¶31

ORDER

¶32

The petition is allowed.

¶33

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime

¶34

No. 48/2024 of Chelur Police Station, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two

¶35

sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶36

a). The petitioner shall not commit any offences. b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶37

c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.

¶38

If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶39

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:19494 CRL.P No. 4019 of 2024

¶42

Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.

¶43

Sd/JUDGE

¶44

JS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15 CT: BHK

Sri Paramesh M C S/O Late Chikkanna v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Paramesh M C S/O Late Chikkanna 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 Ashok Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Dileep Kumara Vs State of Karnataka

C Manjunatha Vs the State of Karnataka

Deepak Alis Deepu Alis Kalla Deepu Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Vinoda S/O Chandru Vs State by Yesaluru P.S.

Union of India Vs Thaha Ummer K S