Shri Hanamant Vs the State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2025)

Shri Hanamant Vs the State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner/accused No.3 released on regular bail in Crime No. 167/2024 of Laxmeshwar P.S. on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, subject to conditions: (iii) not to tamper with prosecution witnesses in any manner; (iv) to attend the Court regularly; (v) not to leave the jurisdiction of Gadag District without prior permission; violation of any one of the conditions entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner/accused No.3 is entitled to be released on regular bail in Crime No. 167/2024 of Laxmeshwar P.S., pending on the file of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, for offences under Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of the Child Marriage Act, 2006, Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 376(2)(n) IPC. +1 more

Court's answer

Other apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable conditions.

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of the Aadhar Card placed on record, the victim girl's date of birth is mentioned as 21.04.2006 and the date of commission of offence according to the prosecution is 21.04.2024.

Key takeaways

Subject to the prosecution establishing the fact that the victim girl is a minor as on the date of incident, the petitioner can be enlarged on bail.ratio¶9
Petitioner enlarged on bail on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum, subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses, shall attend Court regularly and shall not leave the jurisdiction of Gadag District without prior permission; violation of any condition entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.ratio¶¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted — Criminal Petition under S.483 BNSS, 2023 by the husband of the alleged victim girl (arraigned as accused No.3) in Crime No.167/2024 of Laxmeshwar P.S., pending before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, for offences under Ss.9, 10, 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, Ss.4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and S.376(2)(n) IPC — Trial Court had earlier rejected his bail request — Petitioner contended the victim was 18 years old on the date of marriage, substantiated by an Aadhar Card recording her date of birth as 21.04.2006 against the prosecution's offence date of 21.04.2024 — Held: subject to the prosecution establishing that the victim girl was a minor as on the date of incident, the petitioner can be enlarged on bail; other apprehensions of the prosecution met by imposing suitable conditions — Enlarged on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum, with conditions against tampering with prosecution witnesses, requiring regular court attendance and restricting travel outside Gadag District without prior permission; breach of any condition entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail — Observations in the bail order would not affect the rights of the parties during the trial.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6293 CRL.P No. 101296 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101296 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SHRI HANAMANT S/O. CHANDAPPA LAMANI @ LAMBANI, AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, R/O. ARALLI, TQ. SHIRAHATTI, DIST. GADAG.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ROSHAN SAHEB CHABBI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH LAXMESHWAR P.S., R/BY. S.P.P., HIGH COURT, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.

MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH

Digitally signed byMALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYAKALMATH Location: High Court ofKarnataka, Dharwad BenchDate: 2025.04.09 15:58:08+0530

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GRAM PANCHAYAT, DODDUR VILLAGE, TQ. LAXMESHWAR, DIST. GADAG-582116.

THE PRESIDENT, CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE, GOVERNMENT BOY’S HOME, HEALTH CAMP, BETAGERI, TQ. GADAG, DIST. GADAG-582101.

SMT. JYOTI W/O. HANAMANT LAMANI @ LAMBANI, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC.HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. ARALLI, TQ. SHIRAHATTI, DIST. GADAG.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. HANUMESH M. DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6293 CRL.P No. 101296 of 2025

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO. 167/2024 OF LAXMESHWAR PS, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG, FOR THE ALLEGED COMMISSION OF THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 9, 10 AND 11 OF THE PROHIBITION OF THE CHILD MARRIAGE ACT, 2006 AND UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 AND UNDER SECTION 376(2)(n) OF IPC, 1860.

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

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Heard Sri Roshan Saheb Chabbi, learned counsel for petitioner Smt. Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Hanumesh M. Desai, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

Petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer:

“To allow the petition and release the petitioner/accused No.3 on regular bail in Crime No. 167/2024 of Laxmeshwar P.S., now pending on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6293 CRL.P No. 101296 of 2025

Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of the Child Marriage Act, 2006 and under Sections 4 and 6 of the protection of Children Against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC, 1860.”

Laxmeshwar Police registered a case in Laxmeshwar P.S. Crime No.167/2024 based on the complaint lodged by the Panchayat Development OfficerShivanand Malawad contending that accused has committed the offence punishable under Sections 9, 10 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, on 01.12.2024.

After thorough investigation, charge sheet is filed wherein it is alleged that victim girl is a minor and therefore, the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘POCSO Act’, for short) are also invoked.

Bail request by the petitioner is rejected by the learned Trial Judge. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court.

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6293 CRL.P No. 101296 of 2025

Petitioner is the husband of the victim girl. It is

contended before this Court that as on the date of marriage, the victim girl was aged 18 years and therefore, there is no material which would prima facie attract the offences under the provisions of POCSO Act.

To substantiate the same, photocopy of the

Aadhar Card of the victim girl is placed on record.

On perusal of the same, date of birth of the victim girl is mentioned as 21.04.2006 in the Aadhar Card and date of commission of offence according to the prosecution is 21.04.2024.

Taking note of these aspects of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that subject to the prosecution establishing the fact that the victim girl is a minor as on the date of incident, the petitioner can be enlarged on bail.

Other apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable conditions.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6293 CRL.P No. 101296 of 2025

Accordingly, the following order is passed.

ORDER

(i) The criminal petition is allowed .

(ii) Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- [Rupees Fifty Thousand only] with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

(iii) Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

(iv) Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly.

(v) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Gadag District without prior permission.

Observation made by this Court in this bail order would

not affect the rights of the parties during the trial.

Violation of any one of the above conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail.

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

NAA CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 9