IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5300 OF 2017 BETWEEN Manjunath @ Manju, Son of Veerabhadrappa, Aged about 31 years, Residing at No.49, Care of Kidzee School, Near Matri Espera Apartments, Bellandur Post, Bengaluru-560 103.
Permanently residing at Kallur Grama and Post, Kadaba Hobli, Gubbi Taluk, Tumakuru District. ... Petitioner (By Sri.Chandramouli.H.S, Advocate for Sri.Rajanna R. Advocate) AND The State by Marathahalli Police Station, Marathahalli, Bengaluru.
(By Sri B.T.Venkatesh, Spl.P.P) ... Respondent This Crl.P filed u/s.439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.15/2017 (Spl.C.C.No.207/2017) of Marathahalli Police Station, for the offence P/U/S 354 of IPC and Section 8, 10, 12 of POCSO Act.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
ORDER This is a petition filed by petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking his release on bail for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 8, 10 and 12 of POCSO Act and Section 354 of IPC registered by the respondent police in Cr.No.15/2017. After investigation, chargesheet also came to be filed.
2. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution as per complaint averments are that the victim girl child aged about 3 years 8 months was studying in Kidzee School in Kariyammana Agrahara. The victim girl came back weeping and when enquired by her parents they came to know that accused No.1 working in the said school as Supervisor touches all the body parts of the victim girl and committed sexual assault on her which was due to negligence on the part of the school authorities.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent state.
4. During the course of investigation, the statement of the victim girl was recorded before the JMFC Court under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In her statement, she has stated that Manju baiya touched her private part. This statement of the victim girl given before the Court is also in consonance with the allegations made in the complaint. At this stage, there is a prima-facie case. So far as medical evidence is concerned, we have to go by the allegations made in the complaint that some weeks back victim girl came back weeping. This averment in the complaint goes to show that examination of the victim girl is not on the very same day when the alleged incident has taken place and there is a time gap between the incident and examination of the victim girl. But perusing the other materials at this stage, there is a prima-facie case made out by the prosecution against petitioner about his involvement in committing the alleged offence. The victim girl is aged 3 years 8 months. Therefore, it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, petition is hereby rejected.
5. However, the observation made by this Court in the body of the above order while rejecting the bail petition is only for the purpose of disposal of this petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the date of arrest, the petitioner is in custody and there is no progress in the trial of the case. In view of the said submission and provisions under Section 35(1) and (2) of the POCSO Act, learned Special Judge dealing with the matter is hereby directed to take up the matter on day-to-day basis, complete the trial and dispose of the case within the time provided under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act. In case it is not completed, the petitioner is at liberty to move the concerned court seeking his release on bail.
Intimate the concerned court accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-