IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.2771 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Basavaraja.S, S/o.Suresha.C.R, Aged 19 years, R/o.Thagyamma Extension, Chennarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District-573 116. …Petitioner (By Sri.K.Ravishankar, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, Represented by SHO, Chennarayapatna Town Police, Hassan District-573 116. ... Respondent (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.357/2018 (Spl.C.C.No.59/2019) of Channarayapatna Town P.S., Hassan for the offence p/under Sections 363, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest pursuant to proceedings in Crime No.357/2018 (Spl.C.C.No.59/2019) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on the basis of the complaint dated 12.09.2018 filed by the mother of the victim stating that her daughter did not return home from college, a complaint was registered. It is the case of the prosecution that investigation was conducted and on the basis of the statement recorded during the course of investigation, offences as mentioned above are alleged to have been committed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the statement of the victim recorded before the Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C on 14.09.2018 and the further statement of the victim recorded before the Magistrate on 12.10.2018 does not support the case of the prosecution insofar as there is clear averment that there was no sexual assault. It is further submitted that even if it is assumed there was physical intimacy, it was consensual and hence, commission of offence is a matter to be proved during trial and hence it is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as prayed for.
4. Taking note of, the fact that investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed, the stand of the victim in the statement recorded under 164 of Cr.P.C, petitioner has made out a case for being enlarged on bail. No doubt it would be inappropriate at this point of time to record any findings conclusive as regards the weight to be attached to the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and its impact on trial. However, for the present taking note of the version of the victim as per statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C has been recorded, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.357/2018 (Spl.C.C.No.59/2019) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.357/2018 (Spl.C.C.No.59/2019) within 15 days from the date of release of the order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with a surety for the likesum before the concerned court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way, any witness.
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with further investigation by appearing before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called upon.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer and shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE NS