IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5415/2019 BETWEEN:
RAMU S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT # 7, 10TH CROSS NEAR SONAL GARMENTS KAVERI NAGARA, LAGGERE BANGALORE– 560026. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATH.M.R., ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAJAGOPALANAGARA POLICE REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 439 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.107/2018 [SPL. C.C.NO.675/2018] OF RAJAGOPAL NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 363, 366, 376 OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT AND SECTION 4 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.107/2018 of Rajagopal Nagar police station for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 4 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.
3. The genesis of the case of the prosecution are that the father of the victim filed a missing complaint on 28.02.2018 at about 2.00 p.m., stating that he is working as a meson. His sister victim was also working with him as a helper. On 24.02.2018 at about 7.30 p.m., she went out but has not returned back and on enquiry with the relatives and friends, he did not found her and hence, filed the complaint. Thereafter, investigation revealed that the petitioner took the minor victim girl and got her married. Thereafter, he had sexually assaulted victim her will against and then she has been brought back, when she was tested medically if disclosed that she has been sexually assaulted. On the basis of the said statement of the victim, Section 366 and 376 and other provisions of law have been included. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already the victim has been examined before the Court as PW-3 and she has not supported the case of the prosecution and she has been treated as hostile. It is his further submission that PW-2 and PW-3 are the parents of the victim, they have also not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile. Even during the course of cross-examination, nothing has been elucidated so as to substantiate the case of the prosecution. It is his further submission that this Court while dismissing the Crl.P.No.6794/2018 dated 01.04.2019 has given liberty to the petitioner to move the application for bail after examination of the witnesses. The material witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. Under such circumstances, he prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioner on bail.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner took the minor victim girl and got married and as such they have been also prosecuted under Section 4 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. It is his further submission that there is corroboration of the medical evidence with the statement of the victim girl to show that she has been sexually assaulted by the petitioner. Even though the victim has not supported, the other circumstances will also substantiate the case of the prosecution. It is his further submission that the accused has eloped the minor girl and that he has run over a minor girl and the parents have not supported the case of the prosecution. If he is enlarged on bail, he may abscond he may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
6. As could be seen from the records that there are serious allegations made against the petitioner/accused but this Court has given liberty to the petitioner to move the application for bail after examination of the witnesses. Already the material witnesses have been examined. Including the victim girl, the parents have also not supported the case of the prosecution and they have turned hostile. Even though it is contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the accused/petitioner has also committed an offence under Section 4 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, but the matter which has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of arguments and final decision. I feel that the material witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and the other material witnesses have not been supported the case of the petitioner. Under such circumstances, he is not going to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC. Under the changed circumstances, I feel that the petitioner has made out grounds for enlarge on bail by imposing some stringent conditions.
7. In that light, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail In Crime No.107/2018 of Rajagopal Nagara police station for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 4 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., 1st of every month between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the trial is concluded.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. He shall regularly appear before the Court for trial.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE NC/GBB