Allowed

Parashurama.N v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024CRL.P/8252/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the accused in a POCSO Section 6 and IPC Sections 366(A), 376(2)(n) case. The victim, examined as P.W.1, did not support the prosecution and was treated hostile; only three of thirty-nine witnesses were examined. The High Court granted bail with conditions, without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions on attendance, non-tampering, and travel restrictions.

Parashurama.N Vs State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8252 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

PARASHURAMA.N, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O NAGAPPA, R/AT SOMALAPURA VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 217.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SANDESH T B.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶14

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

BY BASAVAPATTANA POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶16

HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

XXX,

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. M.R.PATIL., HCGP FOR R1;

¶21

VIDE ORDER DATED: 02.09.2024 R2 SERVICE, HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶22

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO

¶23

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶24

ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.181/2023 (SPL.C.NO.12/2024) REGISTERED BY BASAVAPATTANA P.S. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 366(A),376(2)(n) OF IPC AND SEC.6 OF POCSO ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-1 AT DAVANAGERE BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Accused in Spl.C.No.12/2024 pending before the Court of Additional District Judge, FTSC-I, Davanagere, arising out of Crime No.181/2023 registered by Basavapatna Police Station, Davanagere District for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act 2012 is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 though served, is unrepresented before this Court.

¶30

FIR in Crime No.181/2023 was registered by Basavapatna Police Station, Davanagere District initially for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC against the petitioner herein, on the basis of the first information dated

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶32

02.12.2023, submitted by respondent No.2, who is the father of the victim girl aged about 15 years.

¶33

During the course of the investigation, petitioner and the victim girl were traced. Petitioner who was arrested on 07.12.2023, was subsequently produced before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is complete and the charge sheet has been filed against him for the aforesaid offences. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the Trial Court in Spl.C.No.12/2024 was rejected on 04.07.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶34

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and the victim girl are close relatives and they are in love. Victim and her parents have been examined before the Trail Court as P.W-1 to P.W-3. Victim girl has not completely supported the case of the prosecution and therefore, she has been treated as hostile witness. Petitioner aged about 23 years, has no criminal antecedents and is in custody for the last more than 10 months. Accordingly, he prays to allow this petition.

¶35

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition.

¶36

He submits that the victim is a minor and therefore, alleged

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶39

offences get attracted against the petitioner, having regard to the material available on record. Therefore, he prays to dismiss this petition.

¶40

The first information was submitted by respondent No.2, who is the father of the victim girl, after the victim girl was found missing from her house on 30.11.2023. Efforts made by respondent No.2 and his family members to trace the victim girl had failed, and therefore, he had approached the police on 02.12.2023.

¶41

During the course of investigation, the petitioner and the victim girl were traced and petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.12.2023. Statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C was recorded on 12.12.2023. Victim has stated that she was in love with the petitioner, who is her close relative. On 30.11.2023, she had summoned the petitioner near her house and thereafter, travelled with him to Bangalore by train. Subsequently, they came to know about registration of the case and therefore, they had returned to Davanagere in the train and had stayed in the petitioner's house for one day and had sexual intercourse in

¶42

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶43

his house. On the next day they had together gone to the police station.

¶44

Victim girl has been examined as P.W.1 before the Trial Court. Perusal of the deposition of P.W.1 would go to show that she has not completely supported the case of the prosecution and therefore, she was treated as hostile witness and cross-examined by the public prosecutor. Parents of the victim girl have been examined as P.W-2 and P.W-3. Since, victim and her parents have already been examined before the Trial Court, there cannot be any apprehension that the petitioner is likely to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The prosecution has cited thirty nine charge sheet witnesses in the present case and only three witnesses have been examined till date. Therefore, the chances of trial being completed in the near soon is very remote. Petitioner who has no criminal antecedents is in custody from 07.12.2023. He is aged about 23 years. Having regard to the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the view that, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:-

¶45

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶46

ORDER

¶47

The petition is allowed .

¶48

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.No.12/2024 pending before the Court of Additional District Judge, FTSC-I, Davanagere, arising out of Crime No.181/2023 registered by Basavapatna Police Station, Davanagere District for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act 2012, subject to the following conditions:

¶49

a) The 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

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:42867 CRL.P No. 8252 of 2024

¶54

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 off.

¶55

KVR

¶56

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶57

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Parashurama.N v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parashurama.N 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

Abubakkar Siddiki Vs State of Karnataka

Thaseen Sultana Vs M/S Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Allabakash @ Chindi Bakash Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri. Manjunath v. R. Vs State by Women Police

H P Kusha @ Hulimane Kiran Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ritiksh @ Santhosh Vs State of Karnataka