IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6015/2017 BETWEEN:
K G Manjunatha S/o Ganganna Aged about 27 years R/at Karijeerahalli Village Belluru Hobli Nagamangala Taluk Mandya District-571 418.
Present r/at near Bus Stand Srinagara Bangalore-560 012. ... PETITIONER (By Sri H V Subramanya, Adv.) AND:
State by Hanumanthanagara Police Station Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bangalore-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.88/2017 (SPL.C.C.No.326/2017) of Bellur P.S., Mandya District, for the offence P/U/S 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and also under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 registered in respondent – police station Crime No.88/2017.
2. The case of the prosecution case is, victim herself is the complainant. She has stated in the complaint that she is the permanent resident of Channavalli village, Nagamangala taluk, Ramanagara District. Her father is blind. She was residing along with her sister and attending the school. Thereafter, she started to work in the house of one Ganganna and was also attending the classes. The said Ganganna started abusing the complainant insisting her to do lot of work and after completing of the work, she used to attend the school. The said Ganganna and his wife insisted the complainant to settle at Bangaluru. Therefore, on their advice, complainant left her father at Channavalli and went to Bengaluru and joined as a maid servant where the petitioner herein was also working. It is further alleged that during Sundays petitioner used to take her to his sister’s house and was sexually assaulting the complainant by mixing sleeping tablets with coffee. She worked there for about three months and thereafter she left the said house and started to leave with her father and sister. After five months of the date of joining her father and sister, they have asked why her abdomen is fatty to which the complainant said there is nothing. However, on doubt, the sister and brother-in-law of the complainant took her to the hospital and the doctor confirmed that she is carrying six months pregnancy. Later on complaint came to be filed, on the basis of which, case was registered against the petitioner.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and entire charge sheet material including the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate Court.
5. The materials placed on record shows that when the complainant was working along with the present petitioner she was aged 14 years. In the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. she has mentioned her age as 15 years. In her further statement recorded by the police and also in the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. she has deposed that the petitioner used to take her to his sister’s house on every Sunday and mix tablet in the coffee and he used to have sexual intercourse with her.
6. It is no doubt true as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein that there is a delay in lodging the complaint. But looking to the materials placed on record, when she was brought back to her parents place and was enquired by her family members about her fatty stomach, at the first instance, she has denied. This itself shows that the girl who is only 15 years old does not know what to say before the family members as to what has happened to her and the manner in which the alleged incident has taken place.
Hence, I am of the opinion that when all other materials show prima facie involvement of the petitioner in committing the alleged offences, only on the ground of delay, discretion cannot be exercised in favour of the petitioner.
Accordingly, petition is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp