Khadak Bohra Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN C.R.NO.429/2025 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1 MAHADEVAPURA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 9 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT AND U/S 4, 6, 5(j) OF POCSO ACT, U/S 65(2) OF BNS, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC-V) COURT, AT BENGALURU.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.429/2025 of Mahadevapura Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Section 4, 6, 5(j) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 65(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

¶26

It is alleged that the petitioner has married a minor girl aged 17 years and subjected her to penetrative

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:35723 CRL.P No. 12220 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

sexual assault, on account of which she became pregnant and gave birth to a child.

¶30

Complaint is lodged by one Naresh Bohara,

¶31

relative of the victim, on the basis of which the aforementioned case is registered against the petitioner on 07.07.2025.

¶32

According to prosecution, victim was a minor aged about 17 years, when the petitioner married her. However, learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the victim’s date of birth is 01.01.2004 and therefore, she was a major when she married the petitioner. He submits that the victim has given birth to a child, now two months old and except the petitioner there is no one to look after the victim and the baby.

¶33

Learned counsel for respondent No.2/defacto complainant submits on instruction that the complainant and the victim have no objection to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:35723 CRL.P No. 12220 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Learned Additional SPP contended that if the

¶38

petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is likelihood of tampering the evidence and prosecution witnesses.

¶39

The marriage of the victim with the petitioner is said to have taken place in the year 2024. The complaint is lodged on 07.07.2025. Victim was subjected to radiological examination. As per the said report, her age has been estimated between 17 – 19 years. Except the said document there is no other material placed on record by the prosecution to confirm the age of the victim. From the radiological report, at this stage, it cannot be conclusively said that the victim was a minor as on the date of commission of offence. Petitioner has under taken to furnish sufficient surety to ensure his presence before the trial Court. He is aged about 19 years. His further detention in custody may have adverse effect on him. Considering the facts of circumstances, petitioner can be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, the following:

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:35723 CRL.P No. 12220 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i. Petition is allowed.

¶44

ii. Petitioner/accused in Crime No.429/2025 of

¶45

Mahadevapura Police Station, Bengaluru City, shall be enlarged on bail, subject to following conditions:

¶46

He shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the likesum, one of them shall be a local surety, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶47