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

Muttaiah G M @ Muttaraju vs A Reddy

High Court Of Karnataka|15 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6212/2019 BETWEEN:
Muttaiah G M @ Muttaraju S/o Muninanjaiah Aged about 25 years R/at House belongs to Dilip 4th Cross, Eshwara Temple Road Jaraganahalli, J.P.Nagar 6th Phase, Bengaluru-560 078 (By Sri R.V.Shivananda Reddy, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by Konanakunte Police Station Bengaluru – 560 062 Represented by Government Pleader High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001 (By Sri Rohith B J, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.191/2019 of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 5(L), 5(J)(ii), 6 of POCSO Act and Section 376 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The respondent-police have laid a charge sheet against the petitioner and another accused by name Naga for the offence punishable under Sections 5(L), 5(J)(ii), 6 of POCSO Act and also Section 376 of IPC.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner about three years prior to the alleged incident was following the victim girl and forcing her to love him and in this context she also agreed to love him and thereafter they started loving each other. In the month of February 2019, when no person was there in the house of the complainant, this petitioner entered into the house and while talking with the victim girl has actually persuaded her to have sexual act with him and accordingly he enjoyed the sex with the victim girl and thereafter also on several occasions they went together to park and other places and thereafter the petitioner has further developed physical intimacy with her and have sexual activity with her. During the course of investigation the police also got recorded the statement of the victim girl under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C., wherein she has stated that the accused had forced her to love him and thereafter they had sexual activity with each other. But apart from that she has also stated that when she was studying in PUC, the accused No.2 Naga has developed intimacy with her and he also had sexual act with her and because of that she became pregnant of 5 months. Records also show that the said pregnancy had been terminated subsequently. The materials collected by the police discloses that as on the date of the alleged incident, the victim girl was aged 7 days short of 18 years. Therefore during the course of trial the above said allegations have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt whether she was a consenting party or only due to persuasion of the petitioner, she is in love with him.
4. However, records also show that she had fell in love with some other person also and became pregnant. Therefore under the above said facts and circumstances exclusively the offence alleged to have been committed by this accused has to be proved during the course of trial. Apart from the above the accused No.2 Nagaraju has approached the Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.7202/2019 and he was released on bail vide orders dated 16.09.2019. Considering the above said facts, nature of the allegations and also the release of accused No.2 on bail, the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence the following:
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in Cr.No.191/2019 of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 5(L), 5(J)(ii), 6 of POCSO Act and Section 376 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall execute a 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.
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.
Kmv/-
Sd/- JUDGE
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

Muttaiah G M @ Muttaraju vs A Reddy

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
15 October, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra