Sri Chidananda v M @ Nandu Vs the State of Karnataka

SMT. MALLIKA B WIFE OF BABU. K, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.30, 11TH CROSS, SARAKKI POWER HOUSE, SARANDAGHARA, JP NAGAR 1^ST PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP FOR R1, R2 WAS PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT)

¶31

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN SPL.CC.NO.67/2026 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.255/2025 OF J.P.NAGAR P.S., BENGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 137(2) AND 64(1) OF BNS, 2023, AND U/S 4 OF POCSO ACT, 2012, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-III, AT BENGALURU.

¶32

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

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:15977 CRL.P No. 3183 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner who is the sole accused in Crime No.255/2025 filed by the respondent – Police for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNS) and Sections 6 and 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO’).

¶39

Factual matrix of the case:

¶40

The case of the prosecution is that a complaint came to be filed by the complainant who is the mother of the victim stating that she was living along with her family at J.P.Nagar II Phase and she was working in the Telecom Office. She had two children, her second daughter who is the victim in this case was aged about 17 years and was studying II P.U.C in V.E.T College, II Phase, J.P.Nagar. On 13.11.2025, the victim had informed the complainant that she would bring panipuri/chat and went out of the house. However, she did not return back to house even after 7.00 p.m. Then, the complainant called the victim over the

¶41

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15977 CRL.P No. 3183 of 2026

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

phone, however, it was switched off. Later, the complainant has remembered that the victim was in love with the petitioner and the petitioner might have kidnapped her daughter. Hence, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant suspecting the involvement of the petitioner.

¶44

Based on the said information, the respondent -

¶45

Police have registered a case against the unknown person. Thereafter, they conducted investigation and submitted the charge-sheet.

¶46

Heard Sri. Prasanna Kumar S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Anitha Girish N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State of Karnataka.

¶47

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶48

the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, the petitioner has been misguided the petitioner that she has completed

¶49

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15977 CRL.P No. 3183 of 2026

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

18 years and she has insisted and pressurized him that he

¶52

should take her away from her parents or else she would be killed. Based on the said pressure of the victim, the petitioner took her to Goa and come back to Bengaluru voluntarily.

¶53

It is further submitted that there were several messages were exchanged between the petitioner and the victim. The petitioner is aged about 18 years and he is the resident of Hulimavu, Bengaluru. He will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶54

Per Contra , learned High Court Government

¶55

Pleader for respondent No.1 – State of Karnataka vehemently submitted that the petitioner has committed heinous offence. He had kept several photographs and videos of the victim with him and he was blackmailing her. Due to the said threat and fear, the victim had

¶56

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15977 CRL.P No. 3183 of 2026

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

accompanied the petitioner. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner. Making such submissions learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State of Karnataka prays to reject the petition.

¶59

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the charge-sheet. It appears from the record that the petitioner was studying II PUC at V.E.T College, II Phase, J.P.Nagar. He got acquainted with the victim who was studying I PUC in the same college. They used to talk with each other. The petitioner had kidnapped the victim from her lawful custody from her parents and took her to Goa and it is alleged that the petitioner had committed sexual assault on her on several occasions.

¶60

Be that as it may. On going through the

¶61

documents made available by the petitioner along with the petition, this Court has noticed several messages sent by

¶62

7 -

¶63

NC: 2026:KHC:15977 CRL.P No. 3183 of 2026

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

the victim to the petitioner and she has pressured him to take her to some other place from her parents and further she has stated that she would be killed by her parents if she stays in the house along with her parents.

¶66

Having considered the said aspect, it is

¶67

appropriate to grant him bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

i. This Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶70

ii. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.255/2025 filed by the respondent – Police for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the BNS, 2023, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lakh only) with one (01) surety to the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶71