Allowed

Rangaswamy v. State by Kengeri Police

Karnataka HC30 Oct 2024CRL.P/9234/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.3, alleged to be a customer who attempted sexual intercourse with a rescued minor victim, sought regular bail under Section 483 BNSS for ITP Act, POCSO and BNS offences. With investigation complete and charge sheet filed, and no criminal antecedents, the High Court allowed the petition subject to conditions including personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on regular bail in Crime No.393/2024 on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions on appearance, no witness tampering and no similar offences.

Rangaswamy Vs State by Kengeri Police — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9234 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

RANGASWAMY S/O LATE SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 107, NEAR ANJAYENA TEMPLE, BETTANAPALYA VILLAGE, RAMOHALLI POST, KENGARI HOBLI, BANGALORE - 560 060.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

STATE BY KENGERI POLICE BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE. PIN CODE NO. 560001.

¶13

SOWMYA N W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WOMEN PROTECTION WING, CCB, N T PETE, BANGALORE, PIN CODE NO. 560002.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. CHENNAPPA EERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1 SMT. FEBA NISHA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶18

ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.393/2024 OF KENGERI POLICE BENGALURU ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-V AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3, 4, 5 OF ITP ACT AND SECTIONS 4, 6 AND 8 OF POCSO ACT AND FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143(2) AND 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 64 OF BNS ACT BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Accused No.3 in Crime No.393/2024 registered by

¶23

Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 & 5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956, Sections 143(2), 143(3) & 64 of BNS 2023 and Sections 4, 6 & 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS Act 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

FIR in crime No.393/2024 was registered by

¶26

Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru City, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 & 5 of Immoral

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶29

Traffic Prevention Act, 1956, Sections 143(2), 143(3) of BNS 2023, against Mangala and another on the basis of the first information dated 01.08.2024 received from Sowmya N, Police officer attached to Kengeri Police Station Bengaluru. During the course of investigation of the case petitioner herein was arrested on 02.08.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is now completed and charge sheet has been filed as against seven persons for the aforesaid offences.

¶30

Bail application filed by the petitioner herein before the Court of the trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.7701/2024 was rejected on 30.08.2024.

¶31

Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is alleged to be a customer, therefore a question arises whether the alleged offences get attracted against the petitioner herein. Petitioner was not aware of the age of the victim, he has no other criminal antecedents.

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶34

Investigation in the case is already completed. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶35

Per contra, learned HCGP and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 who has filed statement of objections have opposed the bail petition. Learned HCGP submits that the victim is a minor and therefore alleged offences get attracted even against the petitioner. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed reliance on the order passed by the High Court of Kerala, in Crl.Revision Petition No.1208/2023 in the case of Abhijith Vs State of Kerala and submits that even a customer is liable to be tried for offences punishable under the provisions of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act., 1956. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.

¶36

Perusal of the first information dated 01.08.2024 would reveal, the first informant had received a credible information that accused Nos.1 ad 2 named in the FIR were carrying on the illegal business of prostitution in a apartment situated within the jurisdiction of Kengeri

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶39

Police Station. Based on such information FIR was registered and thereafter raid was conducted to the alleged premises were accused Nos.1 and 2 were carrying on the business of prostitution. From the premises in question, the victim girl who was a minor was rescued and the petitioner herein was found in the premises in question was also apprehended. Subsequently, petitioner herein was produced before the Jurisdictional Court and remanded to judicial custody.

¶40

As per the charge sheet allegation, the petitioner herein was a customer and allegation against him is that he had attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim girl on 01.08.2024. Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.9617/2021 disposed of on 03.02.2022 as observed as follows:

¶41

Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, in respect of offences under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 is concerned, the same does not attract against this petitioner. However, C.W.2 is a minor and this petitioner is a

¶42

¶43

NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶44

customer and also according to the prosecution, the victim is aged about 17 years, 9 months. When this petitioner went as a customer, the very ingredients of Section 376 of IPC attracts or not is a matter of trial. Since, this petitioner is in custody from 23.10.2021 and already investigation has been completed and charge-sheet is filed, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶45

Investigation in the case is completed and

¶46

charge sheet has been already filed. Even in the charge sheet, allegation against the petitioner herein is that he had attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim girl on 01.08.2024. Undisputedly, he has no criminal antecedents. The judgment in the case of Abhijith vs State of Kerala, on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for respondent No.2 was passed in a Criminal Revision Petition, wherein a question arose, whether a customer found in a brothel can be charged for the offences punishable under the provisions of Immoral

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶49

Traffic Prevention Act., 1956. The present petition is filed seeking regular bail and therefore the order on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for respondent No.2 cannot be made applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case at this stage. In my considered view, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case more so having regard to the nature of the allegation found in the charge sheet against the petitioner his prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively.

¶50

Accordingly, the following order.

¶51

O R D E R

¶52

The petition is allowed .

¶53

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.393/2024 registered by Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 & 5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956, Sections 143(2), 143(3) & 64 of BNS 2023 and Sections 4, 6 & 8 of

¶54

¶55

NC: 2024:KHC:43762 CRL.P No. 9234 of 2024

¶56

the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:

¶57

a) Petitioner shall execute a 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;

¶58

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;

¶59

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

¶60

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

¶61

SD/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶62

ASN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15

Rangaswamy v. State by Kengeri Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rangaswamy v. State by Kengeri Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Karnataka Vs Sri Arun Kumar C.

Sri Ramesh G K Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Jeevan Kumar S Vs State by Ramanagara Womens Police Station

Dipti K Simha Vs the State

Ananda R N Vs State of Karnataka

Prashar Vyas @ Parashar Vrujlal Vyas Vs State of Karnataka