Bharath M.N Vs State of Karnataka by

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY S.H.O., M.K.DODDI POLICE STATION, CHANNAPATTANA TALUK, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶15

XXXXX

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R-1; NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O.DTD.18.03.2025)

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:20760 CRL.P No. 11800 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.49/2024, PENDING FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS CHARGESHEETED BY M.K.DODDI POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF FIRST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT RAMANAGARA IN CRIME NO.7, M.K.DODDI POLICE STATION IN 376(2)(n) POCSO-4, 5(l) & 6, I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAMANAGARA.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Accused in Spl.C.No.49/2024 pending before the

¶26

Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, arising out of Crime No.7/2024 registered by M.K.Doddi Police Station, Ramanagara, for the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) and Section 376(2)(n) of IPC, is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:20760 CRL.P No. 11800 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

No.1/State and respondent No.2 who is served in the matter has remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶32

FIR in Cr.No.7/2024 was registered by M.K.Doddi Police Station, Ramanagara, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 4, 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act and under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC against the petitioner herein based on the first information dated 18.1.2024 received from respondent No.2-Gowri, who is the mother of the victim girl aged about 15 years. During the course of investigation, the petitioner herein was arrested on 19.1.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge

¶33

sheet has been filed against the petitioner. His bail application in Crl.Misc.No.397/2024 was rejected before the jurisdictional Sessions Court vide order dated 13.6.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶34

In the first information, it is stated by the

¶35

mother of the victim girl that her minor daughter aged about 15 years had informed her that she had missed her

¶36

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:20760 CRL.P No. 11800 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

periods for about four months and on enquiry, she allegedly informed that the petitioner forcibly had sexual intercourse with her against her wishes and thereafter threatened her with dire consequences and as a result she had conceived. It is in these circumstances, FIR was registered against the petitioner. During the course of investigation, petitioner was arrested on 19.1.2024 and subsequently remanded to the judicial custody. Investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet is filed against the petitioner.

¶39

The DNA test report received from the Forensic Laboratory, Bengaluru, would reflect that the petitioner is excluded from being the biological father of the fetus belonging to the victim which was forwarded to the laboratory for examination while the victim girl is included from being the biological mother of the fetus. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the victim has already been examined before the trial Court as PW2 and in addition to the same, five other witnesses are also

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:20760 CRL.P No. 11800 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

examined. Be that as it may, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 19.1.2024. He is aged about 20 years and his continued detention will have a adverse impact on his future prospects.

¶43

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter,

¶44

the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. The petition is allowed.

¶47

ii. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail

¶48

in Spl.C.No.49/2024 pending before the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, arising out of Crime No.7/2024 registered by M.K.Doddi Police Station, Ramanagara, for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 5(L) and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶49

6 -

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC:20760 CRL.P No. 11800 of 2024

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

a) 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;

¶53

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;

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

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.

¶57

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

¶59

TL

Bharath M.N v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharath M.N v. State of Karnataka by

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

Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumara Vs State of Karnataka

Chikkakalamma Vs State of Karnataka

Rama N Vs State of Karnataka

Nawaz Vs State of Karnataka

Shakih Khan Alias Saqib Alias Starboy Shakib Vs State by Hebbala Police Station