Sri Chandru T Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) PRAYING TO DIRECT HIS ENLARGEMENT ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.78/2024 WHICH IS PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (Jr.Dn.) AND JMFC CHALLAKERE, IN WHICH CASE HE IS ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE ALLEGED COMMISSION OF OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE PENAL UNDER SEC.363, 366, 114 R/W SEC.149 OF

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13801 CRL.P No.3367/2025

¶19

IPC AND SEC.9 AND 11 OF THE PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT REGISTERED BEFORE NAYAKANHALLI POLICE STATION, ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHICH THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT, PROPER AND NECESSARY TO IMPOSE, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Accused No.1 in Crime.No.78/2024 registered by Nayakanhatti police station, Chitradurga for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 114 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 9 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent.

¶25

FIR in Crime.No.78/2024 was registered by Nayakanhatti police station, Chitradurga initially for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC against petitioner and another based on first information dated 02.05.2024 submitted by Jayanna O., father of the

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13801 CRL.P No.3367/2025

¶27

victim girl. During the course of investigation of the case, the petitioner herein was arrested on 28.01.2025 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. Bail application filed before the Jurisdictional Sessions court in Crl.Misc.No.128/2025 was rejected on 22.02.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the grounds urged in this petition and submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and the alleged offences are not punishable with death or life imprisonment. Investigation of the case is completed. Accordingly, prays to allow the petition.

¶29

Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State, who has opposed the petition, does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶30

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the petitioner is the paternal uncle of the victim girl and allegation against him is that he had forcibly

¶31

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13801 CRL.P No.3367/2025

¶32

entered into the house of the first informant on 02.05.2024 and taken the victim girl along with him and thereafter married her. Accused No.2 is said to have assisted accused No.1. Undisputedly petitioner has no criminal antecedent. The alleged offences are neither punishable with death or life imprisonment. Investigation of the case is already completed.

¶33

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter and also having regard to the nature of allegations found against the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered in the affirmative. Accordingly, the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime.No.78/2024 registered by Nayakanhatti police station, Chitradurga for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 114 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 9 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, subject to the following conditions:

¶36

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13801 CRL.P No.3367/2025

¶37

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum

¶38

of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶39

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;

¶40

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶41

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.

¶42

Sd/(S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶43

ABK

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44

Sri Chandru T v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Chandru T v. 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

State of Karnataka Vs Sri. G Krishnegowda

Sri. Madhu K., Vs State of Karnataka

Shanthakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sannamallige Vs State by Bilikere Ps

Sri Syed Afsan Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Nikhil M M Vs State of Karnataka