IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4705/2017 Between:
Ravi S/o Durugappa Aged about 35 years Coolie R/o Haliyur village Chitradurga Taluk & Distric. PIN-577 526.
(By Sri. Maruthi G.B, Advocate) And State of Karnataka Represented by Holalkere Police Chitradugra District- 577 526.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court Buildings Bengaluru – 560 001.
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP.) …Petitioner …Respondent This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.448/2016 registered by the Holalkere Police Station, Chitradurga District for the offences punishable under sections 376(2)(N) r/w 34 of IPC and Sec. 4, 6 of POCSO Act and Sec.9 of Child Marriage Prohibition Act.
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 High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest by the respondent-police in respect of Crime No.448/2016 registered by the respondent-police. Now the chargesheet is submitted to the Court in respect of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(N) of IPC and Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 9 of Child Marriage Prohibition Act, 2006.
3. The allegation of the prosecution is, the first accused procured the victim girl from the bus stand of Chitradurga, took her to the temple, tied tali forcibly and committed rape on her in the house of CW10, etc. The co-accused connived with him for the commission of offence.
4. Sri Maruthi. G. B., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arraigned as accused in the FIR. He was not called for interrogation by the investigating officer. Abruptly at the time of submitting the chargesheet, he has been arraigned as accused No.2. He is not a member of the family of accused No.1 and he is nowhere connected to the offence alleged or to the party concerned. If, anticipatory bail is granted, he will surrender before the concerned Court and participate in the proceedings.
5. Perused the chargesheet papers. During the further statement of the victim girl recorded on 28.03.2017, she named this petitioner as the uncle of the first accused but as per the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is not related to the family of first accused. Even in her statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. on 18.01.2017, this petitioner was not named by the victim girl. In the given circumstances, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.448/2016 registered by the respondent-Police, for a limited period of three weeks.
Within the above period, he shall surrender before the concerned Court and move for regular bail.
Until disposal of the bail petition, this order will be in force.
In the event of his arrest within the above period by the respondent-Police, he shall be released on bail on his executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety for the likesum.
Sd/- JUDGE DL