Thippesha Alias Thippeswamy N. Vs the State of Karnataka by Challakere Police Station

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN SPL.C (POCSO) NO.61/2024 IN CR.NO.96/2024 OF CHALLAKERE P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF SPECIAL 2nd ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA, CHARGE SHEETED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 363,376(2)(n) OF IPC, U/S 4,6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Accused in Special Case No.61/2024 pending before

¶30

the Court of Special II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chithradurga, arising out of Crime No.96/2024 registered

¶31

by Challakere Police Station, Challakere, for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, is before this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:27295 CRL.P No. 9223 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶35

learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State.

¶36

FIR in Crime No.96/2024 was registered by Challakere Police, Chithradurga, initially for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC against the accused based on the first information dated 02.03.2024 received

¶37

from respondent No.2, who is mother of the victim girl.

¶38

During the course of investigation of the case, the petitioner was arrested on 03.03.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing the investigation, chargesheet has been filed against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

¶39

The bail petition filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected and therefore,

¶40

he had approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.12884/2024, which was dismissed with a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the trial

¶41

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:27295 CRL.P No. 9223 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

within 4 months, failing which the petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh petition before this Court. It is under

¶44

these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court in this successive bail petition.

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the victim girl has been already examined as PW.1. The trial in the case is not yet completed. The petitioner who has no criminal antecedents is in custody for the last more than 16 months. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶46

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the petition and prays to dismiss the bail petition.

¶47

FIR in the present case was initially registered for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC after the

¶48

victim girl was found missing. During the course of the investigation of the case, the petitioner and victim girl was traced. The petitioner aged about 23 years, is in custody

¶49

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:27295 CRL.P No. 9223 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

from the date of his arrest. The victim girl is examined as PW.1 and her mother respondent No.2, who is the first informant is examined as PW.2.

¶52

This Court while rejecting the earlier bail petition of the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.12884/2024 disposed of on 06.01.2025 had directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the trial within 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Though more than 7 months have lapsed from the date of the order, the trial in the present case is not completed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that many more chargesheet witnesses are still to be examined. Since the material prosecution witnesses have already been examined, there cannot be any apprehension that the petitioner may tamper with the material chargesheet witnesses. The petitioner aged about 23 years, has no criminal antecedents. He is in custody from 03.03.2024. His continued detention is likely to have adverse impact on his career and future prospects. Under these

¶53

6 -

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:27295 CRL.P No. 9223 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

circumstances, I am of the view that without expressing

¶57

any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, the petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively.

¶58

Accordingly, the following:

¶59

ORDER

¶60

The Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶61

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Special Case No.61/2024 pending before the Court of Special II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chithradurga, arising out of Crime No.96/2024 registered by Challakere Police Station, Challakere, for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:

¶62

a) Petitioner shall execute a 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;

¶63

7 -

¶64

NC: 2025:KHC:27295 CRL.P No. 9223 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

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;

¶67

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

¶68

d) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction

¶69

of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off; and

¶70

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

¶71

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶72

DL

Thippesha Alias Thippeswamy N. v. the State of Karnataka by Challakere Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thippesha Alias Thippeswamy N. v. the State of Karnataka by Challakere Police Station

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

Mr. Madan @ Abhith Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Narasimha Murthy Vs State of Karnataka

Kiran N v Vs the State of Karnataka

Sheak Muzamil Ahamad Alias Shaik Muzammil Ahmed Vs State by

Sri Akbar Baig Vs the State of Karnataka

Ghouse Alias Ghouse Peer Vs State by