IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO Crl.P.No.102686/2017 BETWEEN ARUNAGOUDA BAPANGOUDA PATIL AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HOSAKATTI VILLAGE, KUNDAGOL TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT.
(NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY SINCE 17/02/2017) ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.R.M.JAVED, ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KUNDAGOL P.S., REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP) ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO. 1 ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH KUNDAGOL P.S. CRIME NO. 15 OF 2017 (NOW SPL. S.C.NO. 13 OF 2017) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 342, 376, 324, 504, 506, 34 OF IPC AND SEC. 4 OF POCSO ACT PENDING FILE BEFORE THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND SPL. JUDGE DHARWAD.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail in Crime No.15/2017 of Kundagol P.S. for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376, 324, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
3. The substance of the case are that the victim is the neighbor of the accused No.1/petitioner, who is aged about 16 years. It is complained that on the date of incident, the petitioner asked the victim to get some soap and water to clean his hands, the complainant went to him and then the accused dragged her inside his house and closed the door from outside and went away. After 10 to 15 minutes, he came back to his house and sexually assaulted her. She was let off at 4:00 p.m. after two days. She informed this to her mother, who called the brother of the accused and narrated the incident. On 16.02.2017 at about 8:00 p.m., the accused and his brothers came in front of the house of the complainant said that if they file complaint, they have to face dire consequences and one of the brother of the accused assaulted the victim. On the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, crime came to be registered against the accused before the Police for the aforesaid offences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the petitioner was arrested on 17.02.2017 and he is in judicial custody during the entire investigation. Hence, prays for allowing the bail petition.
5. The learned HCGP opposes the said petition and submits that there are a prima-facie case against the petitioner for having committed the alleged offences. He further submits that the petitioner has misused the minor girl, who is aged about 16 years and he is not entitled for the relief of bail.
6. In the context and circumstances of the case, it is necessary to seen that the accused called the complainant, who is aged about 16 years to get soap and water to wash his hands and when she went to give him soap, he dragged her in a room and bolted the latches of the door from inside and committed the rape on her and also threatened her of dire consequences. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C. revealing the same incident. The medical evidence no where discloses the evidence of any recent sexual assault on the complainant, whereas the complainant approached the police on 17.02.2017 and after more that five to six days she was taken for medical examination. Therefore from the available records, it could safely be inferred that the victim girl was subjected to sexual assault at the hands of the accused. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the sincere view that at this stage the petitioner is not entitled to seek the relief of bail.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Vnp*