Allowed

Sri. Pratap. Ha. Byalyal v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Oct 2024CRL.P/8555/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by accused No.1 in a POCSO case who was charge-sheeted only for abduction, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation and abetment, not sexual assault. Considering his age, lack of antecedents and custody since arrest, the High Court enlarged him on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in SC.No.218/2024 on personal bond Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions on attendance, non-tampering and jurisdiction.

Sri. Pratap. Ha. Byalyal Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8555 OF 2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SRI. PRATAP. HA. BYALYAL S/O HASANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT SHANIMAHATHMA TEMPLE ROAD, AGRAHARA, TUMAKURU CITY - 572 129.

¶6

NATIVE OF BASAVANAGARA, NEAR THE HOUSE OF NAVACHAKRA ADVOCATE, MUDDEBIHAL TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT - 586 212 (PRESENTLY IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY FROM 05-03-2024).

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. DEEPAK M., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY TUMAKURU WOMENS POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.

¶12

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

XXX XXX,

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. M.DIWAKAR MADDUR., HCGP FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 14.10.2024 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT;)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ORDER TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.218/2024 OF TUMAKURU WOMEN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 363,376(D),376(L),376(M),376(N),341,342,506,34 OF IPC 1860 AND SEC.4,6,15,17 OF POCSO ACT 2012 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC I) TUMAKURU.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

Accused No.1 in SC.No.218/2024 pending before the

¶22

Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Tumakuru, arising out of Crime No.43/2024 registered by Tumakuru Women Police Station, Tumakuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(D), 376(L), 376(M), 376(N), 341, 342, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 15 & 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short 'POCSO Act') is before this Court under section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶25

learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2, who is served in the matter, has remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶26

FIR in Crime No.43/2024 was registered by Tumakuru Women Police Station, Tumakuru District against the petitioner and other initially for the offences punishable under Sections 376(D), 342, 363 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 17 of POCSO Act on the basis of the first information dated 04.03.2024 received from the victim girl aged about 17 years.

¶27

During the course of investigation of the case petitioner herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.03.2024. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.853/2024 was rejected on 12.06.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶30

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a youngster aged about 21 years having no criminal antecedents. Charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner only for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 341, 342, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 15 & 17 of POCSO Act. There is no allegation against the petitioner of sexually assaulting the victim girl. According, he prays to allow this petition.

¶31

Per contra , learned HCGP who has opposed the petition, however, does not dispute the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶32

Perusal of the material available on record would go to show that on 04.03.2024, when the victim girl/CW-1 was sitting along with her friend/CW-2 under the banyan tree near Siddaganga hills within the jurisdiction of Tumakuru Women Police Station at about 1:15 pm, accused Nos.1 & 2 came there and informed them that they had video recorded them in the mobile phone of accused No.2 and threatened them that they

¶33

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶34

would circulate the video in social media and accordingly, took CW-1 along with them in a two wheeler. Thereafter, accused Nos.2 and 3 allegedly committed sexual assault on the victim girl/CW-1 in a house and recorded the said act in their mobile phone. Allegation against the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in the charge sheet is that

¶35

he had wrongfully restrained CW-1 and CW-2 and thereafter, had abetted the other accused persons to commit sexual assault on the victim girl. There is no allegation of petitioner committing any sexual assault on the victim girl. Therefore, charge sheet is filed against him only for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 341, 342, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 15 & 17 of POCSO Act. Petitioner aged about 21 years who has no other criminal antecedents is in custody from 05.03.2024 onwards. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Considering the age of the petitioner and also the allegations as against him in the charge sheet, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶38

the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:-

¶39

ORDER

¶40

The petition is allowed .

¶41

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in SC.No.218/2024 pending before the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Tumakuru, arising out of Crime No.43/2024 registered by Tumakuru Women Police Station, Tumakuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(D), 376(L), 376(M), 376(N), 341, 342, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 15 & 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:

¶42

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;

¶43

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC:41319 CRL.P No. 8555 of 2024

¶46

Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against his is disposed off.

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶52

KVR

¶53

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Sri. Pratap. Ha. Byalyal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Pratap. Ha. Byalyal 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

Naveen Kumar @ Naveen Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Sumanth v.Appu Vs the State of Karnataka

Narendra R Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Rajanna, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Devaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Sameer Pasha @ Sameer Vs the State of Karnataka