E a Charanraj S/O. E a Allappa Vs the State of Karnataka

SMT. MANJULA W/O. HANUMAYYA, AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NEAR RAILWAY STATION, OBLAPURA, HIREHALU MANDALAM, TQ. RAIDURGA, DIST. ANDHRA PRADESH-5158665.

¶15

… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED)

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.70/2025 REGISTERED BY KURUGOD P.S., DIST. BALLARI ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, BALLARI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE POCSO ACT AND

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

UNDER SECTIONS 137(2) AND 64 OF BNS, 2023, AND ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶23

Accused in Spl. Case No.664/2025 pending before the Court of Prl. District & Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge, Ballari, arising out of Crime No.70/2025 registered by Kurugod Police Station, Ballari District, for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act, is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶24

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 who is served in the matter, has remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶25

FIR in Crime No.70/2025 was registered by Kurugod Police Station, Ballari District, for the aforesaid offences against the

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

petitioner based on the first information dated 17.03.2025 received from respondent no.2 who is the mother of the victim girl. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner herein was arrested on 18.03.2025 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against him for the aforesaid offences. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.295/2025 was rejected on 16.06.2025. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

In the first information which is submitted by the mother of the victim girl, she has alleged that on 13.03.2025, petitioner who was pestering the minor daughter of the first informant to love him, had taken her along with him from the village festival to his house and had sexual intercourse with her in his house. Subsequently her daughter informed her about the same, and therefore, in respect of the alleged incident that had taken place on 13.03.2025, belatedly she had approached the police on 17.03.2025.

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

During the course of the investigation of the case, the statement of the victim girl who was studying in 1^st year PUC at Ananthapur and was staying in a hostel, was recorded by the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, on 27.03.2025. In the said statement, the victim girl has stated that petitioner is distantly related to her and for the last three months they got acquainted to each other and they started loving each other. Petitioner had purchased a mobile phone and given it to her, and thereafter, they were talking over the mobile phone. On 13.03.2025, she had gone to Ballari and petitioner allegedly called her over mobile phone and invited her for the village festival at Kurugodu. Thereafter, from Ballari bus stand, she had gone along with the petitioner in his motor bike to Kurugodu village and got married in a temple. Subsequently, they went to petitioner’s house at Kyadigehaala and stayed there. On the said day, there was nobody in the house and petitioner had sexual intercourse with her against her wishes. She informed about the same to her elder sister who is married. Thereafter, petitioner’s mother who came there, questioned her why she had come to their house. At that time, her sister and her uncle came to the said house along with the police and brought the petitioner and

¶34

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

her to the police station. On the said day, she had informed to the police only about her marriage with the petitioner, and therefore, police had advised them and asked them to come to the police station on some other day. Subsequently, she returned home and informed about the act of sexual assault committed by the petitioner in his house, and therefore, her mother had approached Kurugod Police Station, subsequently. Thereafter, her medical examination was done.

¶37

Subsequent to recording of statement of the victim girl under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, by the jurisdictional Magistrate, the Investigation Officer has recorded the further statement of the victim girl on 28.03.2025. In the said statement, the victim girl has stated that by mistake she had mentioned in her statement under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, that she had gone to Ballari on 13.03.2025, and on the other hand, she was taken by the petitioner from Kurugod Bus Stand and not from Ballari Bus Stand. She has also stated that petitioner has not married her on 13.03.2025 nor she had gone to the police station on the said date, as stated by her in the statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023.

¶38

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

This further statement recorded by the Investigation Officer is quite contrary to the statement of victim girl that was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, by the jurisdictional Magistrate. After the jurisdictional Magistrate had recorded the statement of the victim girl under Section of BNSS, 2023, her further statement which is contradictory to her earlier statement, ought to have been recorded by the said Magistrate and not by the Investigation Officer.

¶41

Petitioner, aged about 22 years is in custody in the present case for the last more than five months. Investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The material on record would go to show that petitioner and the victim girl were in love and only after her parents came to know about the same, FIR was registered in the present case.

¶42

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case. Accordingly, the following order:

¶43

7 -

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl. Case No.664/2025 pending before the Court of Prl. District & Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge, Ballari, arising out of Crime No.70/2025 registered by Kurugod Police Station, Ballari District, for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions:

¶47

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;

¶48

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;

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11096 CRL.P No. 102602 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

8 -

¶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

Sd/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶56

JUDGE

¶57

KK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 22

E a Charanraj S/O. E a Allappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E a Charanraj S/O. E a Allappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh S/O. Ramappa Nandi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sanjeev S Chitnis Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Ashoka Banta S/O Bommayya Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Aditya S/O Nagesh Banavalikar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mansur S/O Husen Sab Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Shubham S/O Prakash Sarwade Vs the State of Karnataka