Allowed

Mr. G. Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Oct 2024CRL.P/9066/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the petitioner, a headmaster accused of raping a minor girl under the POCSO Act and IPC. The court relied on a DNA test report excluding the petitioner as the father of the fetus mentioned in the FIR.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail subject to personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, regular appearance, no tampering, and non-exit from jurisdiction.

Mr. G. Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9066 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. G. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O. LATE SHRI GOWRAPPA, R/O. ANEMADUGU VILLAGE, BHASHETAHALLI HOBLI, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 105 (IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY SINCE 28.05.2024).

¶10

... PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI N.S. SRIRAJ GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAKESH KINI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY S.H.O. SHIDLAGHATTA POLICE STATION, CHIKABALLAPUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶15

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI CHANAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1; V/O. DATED 20/09/2024 NOTICE TO R-2 IS H/S)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED U/S. 483 BNNS) CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRL.MISC.NO.444/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I AT CHIKKABALLAPURA (CRIME NO.124/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE SIDDLAGATTA RURAL P.S., CHIKKABALLAPURA) FOR THE COMMISSION OF ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 376(2)(F), 506 OF IPC 1860 AND U/S. 5(F), 8, 12 OF POCSO ACT 2012.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Accused in Crime No.124/2024 registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(F), 506 of IPC and Sections 5(F), 8, 12 of the POCSO Act, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Though respondent No.2 is served in the matter, he is unrepresented before this Court.

¶26

FIR in Crime No.124/2024 registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner on the basis of the first information dated 27.05.2024 received from the victim girl, who is the daughter of respondent No.2. During the course of investigation of the

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶29

case, the petitioner was arrested on 28.05.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner on 18.07.2024 for aforesaid offences.

¶30

The bail application filed by the petitioner in Crl. Misc. No.444/2024 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected on 26.07.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in custody from 28.05.2024. Investigation in the case is completed and the charge-sheet has been filed. DNA test report in the present case does not support the case of the prosecution. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶32

Per contra , learned HCGP has opposed the bail application. He submits that the petitioner, who was a headmaster in the school in which the victim girl was studying, has misused his position and committed heinous crime on the victim girl. In the event he is enlarged on bail, he is likely to tamper with the prosecution witness. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶35

The first informant, aged about 13 years, who is the

¶36

victim girl in the present case, has submitted the first information on 27.05.2024, alleging that the petitioner, who was the headmaster in the school in which she was studying, had called her into the office room and had sexually assaulted her against her wish. She has averred that thereafter, the petitioner criminally intimated her and informed her not to reveal about his act to anybody. She has stated that he had repeated the act on several occasions and as a result, she had missed her periods. Her mother had been taken her to Shidlagatta Government Hospital and after medical examination, it was found that she was pregnant and therefore, she approached the police.

¶37

The petitioner, aged about 54 years, was arrested in this case on 28.05.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. The investigation in the case is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed. DNA test report dated 29.07.2024 received from the Director of State Forensic Science Laboratory, Madiwala, Bengaluru in the present case reveals that the DNA profile result of the fetus is not matching with the DNA profile

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶39

result of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is excluded from being the biological father of the fetus. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner’s prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be answered in affirmative subject to appropriate conditions.

¶40

Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

The Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶43

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.124/2024 registered by Shidlagatta Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura, for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(F), 506 of IPC and Sections 5(F), 8, 12 of the POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions:

¶44

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶45

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;

¶46

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:43117 CRL.P No. 9066 of 2024

¶48

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

¶49

d) 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.

¶50

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶51

JUDGE

¶52

MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

Mr. G. Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. G. Venkatesh 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

Abu Sulaiman Mandal Vs the State of Karnataka

Nitesh Ranjan Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Ravindra Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Sarim Khan @ Guddu Vs the State

Prasanna R Vs the State of Karnataka by

Rangaswamy. S Vs State of Karnataka