Allowed

Nagaraja T v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Feb 2026CRL.P/15990/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka granted anticipatory bail to accused No.1 in a criminal case registered for offences under POCSO and BNS, 2023, imposing several stringent conditions requiring cooperation with investigation and periodic appearances.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.107/2025 and ordered to be released on bail if arrested, subject to six conditions including appearance before IO and cooperation with investigation.

Nagaraja T Vs the State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15990 OF 2025 [(438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)]

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

NAGARAJA T. S/O THOTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT MANCHANABALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK - 562 101.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. KALYAN R., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KENCHARLAHALLI P.S. BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

XXX REPTD. BY ITS NATURAL GUARDIAN GRAND MOTHER NAMELY SMT. DAVANAMMA, W/O NAGENDRA, AGEDA ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT. YALAGALHALLI, DIBBURAHALLI POST, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA, KARNATAKA - 562 101.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

(VICTIM AND NATURAL GUARDIAN ARE RESIDING IN SAME ADDRESS AS MENTIONED ABOVE)

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDITIONAL SPP FOR R1; RE - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶22

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION BY GRANTING ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.1) IN CRIME NO.107/2025, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFECNES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 87, 75, 127(3) AND 118(1) OF BNS, 2023 AND UNDER SECTIONS 8, 12 AND 17 OF THE POCSO ACT, 2012, REGISTERED BY THE KENCHARLA HALII POLICE AND PENDING DISPOSAL ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKABALLAPURA BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT PETITION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant bail in Crime No.107/2025 of Kencharlahalli Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

87, 75, 127(3) and 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 8, 12 and 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶31

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and

¶32

learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.

¶33

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that, as per averments of the complaint filed by the victim, the incident has taken place on 18.05.2025 and on the next day she made a phone call and she was rescued by the officials of Child Development Department. But, the complaint has been filed on 01.06.2025. There is a delay in filing the complaint. The offences under Sections 87 and 118(1) of BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and they are alleged against accused No.2 who is the father of the victim. The offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 8 of POCSO Act is provided with sentence of

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

imprisonment for three (3) years which may extend to five (5) years and offence under Section 12 of POCSO Act is provided with punishment of imprisonment which may extend to three (3) years. Section 17 of POCSO Act is also not attracted and it is alleged against accused No.2 - father of the victim. The petitioner is a married man aged forty nine (49) years having wife and children. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With these, he prayed to allow the petition.

¶37

Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent would contend that, the victim is aged fourteen (14) years and it is her father/accused No.2 has insisted her to go with the petitioner as they intend to marry her with the petitioner. The petitioner is aged forty nine (49) years and he is a married man. The investigation is in progress. The petitioner is required for

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

custodial interrogation. With these, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

¶41

Having heard the learned counsels appearing

¶42

for parties, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and and other materials placed on record.

¶43

On the basis of the statement of the victim girl dated 01.06.2025, a case came to be registered against the petitioner and another in Crime No.107/2025 for the aforesaid offences. The allegation in the said statement of the victim is that, her father intended to perform her marriage with the petitioner. The petitioner took the victim girl and her father to the house of his relative and where it is alleged that, he touched her chest and body. The offences alleged against the petitioner under Section 8 of POCSO Act is provided with sentence of imprisonment for three (3) years which may extend to five (5) years and offence under Section 12 is provided with punishment of imprisonment which may extend to three (3) years. The

¶44

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

petitioner is a married man having wife and children. The allegations made against the petitioner are required to be ascertained after investigation. The petitioner has undertaken to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

¶47

Considering all the above aspects, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions. In the result, the following;

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The Criminal Petition is allowed . The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.107/2025 of Kencharlahalli Police Station and is ordered to be released on bail in the event his arrest, subject to following conditions:

¶50

i) The petitioner shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from this day and execute bail bond

¶51

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶54

ii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation.

¶55

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called for.

¶56

iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶57

v) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all dates hearing unless exempted and cooperate for speedy disposal of the case in case of filing of final report.

¶58

vi) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. for a

¶59

NC: 2026:KHC:5996 CRL.P No. 15990 of 2025

¶60

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

period of one month or till the filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.

¶63

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶64

KLV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Nagaraja T v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagaraja T v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Mahesh @ Handigala Mahesha Vs the State by Sidlaghatta Rural Police Station

Mr. Appu Gowda L Vs State by Kanakapura Rural Police

M.Sarathi Vs State of Karnataka by

Pruthviraj Vs State of Karnataka

Gopinath G L Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Magesh Babu G Vs the State of Karnataka