Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Madan Kumar K @ Madan @ Chintu vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|04 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7500 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
MADAN KUMAR K @ MADAN @ CHINTU, S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT NO.39, MARUTHI NILAYA, CHUNCHAGATTA, NEAR GOVERNMENT SCHOOL, KONANAKUNTE POST, BENGALURU.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI.RUDRAPPA P., ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU. REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.205/2019 OF KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 354-D, 384 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 15 AND 17 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND SECTION 67 OF I.T. ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State and perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in Crime No.205/2019 of konanakunte Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354(D) and 384 r/w Section 34 of IPC, 1860, Sections 15 and 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
3. The brief allegations are that, when the complainant was studying in I PUC, one Harshapande, accused No.1 was always following her and forcing her to love him. It is alleged that when she was talking with one Shashi Kumar, accused No.1 has taken photographs and threatened her that he would send those photographs to her father making gossip that she was in love with the said Shashi Kumar. It is further alleged that he demanded her to send her nude videos for the purpose of deleting the earlier photographs and also threatened her in the above such manner. Therefore, it is alleged that she sent her nude video to him, but accused No.1 has sent the same to accused Nos.2 to 5 who are his friends. It is further contended that accused No.2 has demanded an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- each to accused Nos.2 to 5 for the purpose of deleting the said nude videos.
4. On the above said allegations, this Court has already considered the bail petitions of accused Nos.4 and 5 and have already released on bail in Crl.P.No.5681/2019 and Crl.P.No.5559/2019 vide order dated 6.09.2019 and 11.09.2019 on certain conditions.
5. There is no distinct and separate allegations made against the present petitioner. Hence he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the following ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.2 shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.205/2019 of Konanakunte Police Station registered against him for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354(D) and 384 r/w Section 34 of IPC, 1860, Sections 15 and 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67 of Information & Technology Act, 2000, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (One lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause; and (iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE HR
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Madan Kumar K @ Madan @ Chintu vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
04 November, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra