Shankar @ Shankar S Vs State of Karnataka by

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL IN CR.NO.98/2025 IN SPL.C.NO.387/2025 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1 THALAGHATTAPURA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 4,5(L),5(p),6 OF POCSO ACT, U/S 3(1)(w)(i),3(2)(V) OF SC/ST ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE ADDL. DISTRICT AND DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE.

¶22

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶24

3 -

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:31801 CRL.A No. 1635 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 27.06.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1040/2025 by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru and release the appellant on regular bail in Cr.No.98/2025 registered by the Thalaghattapura police station for the offences punishable under Sections 4,5(L),5(p),6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity ‘POCSO’ Act) and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘SC & ST (POA) Act’).

¶29

The ranks of the parties henceforth will be considered as per their rankings before the Trial Court, for convenience.

¶30

Factual matrix of the case:

¶31

It is the case of the prosecution that, the complainant has two children and the victim was aged about 17 years and she was studying in II PUC at Basavanagudi. The complainant belongs to scheduled caste community. The complainant, her elder daughter and her husband went to their

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:31801 CRL.A No. 1635 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

native place on account of festival. The victim was staying alone in the house. The complainant had informed her brother who was residing in the same locality to take care of the victim till they return from the native place. On 13.03.2025 her brother, sister-in-law went to the house of the victim at about 6.30 am and knocked the door. Then, the victim did not open the door. Hence, it was to be broken and opened the door. They found that the accused was staying along with the victim. The said fact was made known to the complainant by her brother. Immediately, the complainant and her family members rushed to the house and spoke about the incident with the parents of the accused. Thereafter, they brought them to the police station for necessary action. Now, the accused is in judicial custody seeking regular bail.

¶36

Heard Smt. Keerthana K, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. Nataraj K, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶37

It is the submission of learned counsel for the

¶38

appellant that the accused is an innocent for the alleged

¶39

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:31801 CRL.A No. 1635 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact,

¶42

the accused has not aware about the actual age of the victim, and he was told that the victim had completed 18 years and her date of birth was wrongly given to the School Authority and the victim is ready to marry him. Hence he was informed to have talked with her. However, in the meantime, the brother of the complainant had noticed the said fact and assaulted the accused and handed over him to the police. The entire case is baseless and bald. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶43

Per contra, learned counsel Sri. Nataraj K, for respondent No.2 vehemently submitted that the act of committing sexual assault on the minor girl is atrocious and it creates scar in the mind of young girl. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him bail.

¶44

The learned HCGP has adopted the submission of the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and she further submitted that the accused has committed sexual assault on the minor girl who belongs to schedule caste community and he had no intention to marry her. However, it is clear that he had

¶45

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:31801 CRL.A No. 1635 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

to clear his lust by taking advantage of the young girl who was belongs to downtrodden community. Therefore, the appeal has to be rejected in order to send strong signal to the society at large. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶48

Having heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint, it appears from the record that the victim was studying in II PUC and however, her age is shown as 17 years. That itself would create suspicion. Therefore, the submission of learned counsel for the appellant has to be accepted for the reasons that there is no whisper in the complaint that the accused was aware about the actual age of the victim. Having considered the age of the victim and also the accused, it is appropriate to enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶49

In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶50

7 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:31801 CRL.A No. 1635 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

ORDER

¶54

i) The criminal appeal is allowed . ii) The order dated 27.06.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1040/2025 by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru is set aside.

¶55

iii) The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.98/2025 in Spl.C.No.387/2025 of Thalaghattapura Police Station, registered for the aforesaid offences subject to the following conditions:

¶56

a) The appellant shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶57