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.6838/2017 BETWEEN:
Sri Duggappa S/o Muniyappa Aged about 36 years Head Master R/at Government High School Gujjepalli village Bagepalli Taluk Chikkaballapura District-561 207. ... PETITIONER (By Sri B M Lokesh, Adv.) AND:
State of Karnataka By Patapalya Bagepalli Police Station Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri K Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.93/2016 of Patapalya P.S., Chickballapura and Spl.S.C.No.10/2017 pending on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chickballapur, for the offences P/U/Ss 376(2)(f) and 506 of IPC and under Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 506 of IPC and also under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.93/2016.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that there is enormous delay in filing the complaint which is not properly explained by the prosecution. The case of the prosecution is not supported by the medical evidence. Even if the prosecution material is considered, the averments in the complaint as well as the statement of the victim girl will not make out a case of the alleged offence of rape. He has submitted that now investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed and from the date of arrest, petitioner is in custody. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his arguments submitted that looking to the statement of the victim girl recorded before the JMFC Court, so also, the averments in the complaint, there is a prima facie case made out by the prosecution as against the petitioner. He has submitted that even the medical record supports the case of he prosecution. Accordingly,, submitted to reject the petition.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
6. The mother of the victim girl is the complainant in this case. She has stated that her daughter aged about 13 years is studying in the Government school in their village. The petitioner herein being the Head Master of the said school was touching the body parts of the victim girl. Further, when she was studying in the 6th standard during noon time, when she had been to washroom, petitioner also went there and committed sexual intercourse on her against her will and also threatened her not to disclose the said fact to anybody.
7. I have perused the statement of the victim girl recorded before the police as well as before the JMFC Court at Chickballapura. In both the statements her age is mentioned as 13 years and in her statement she has consistently stated about the sexual acts done by the petitioner herein against her.
I have also perused the medical records regarding external genital examination of the victim girl. The Doctor who examined the victim girl has mentioned that hymen is not intact. The statement of the victim girl, contents of the complaint filed by the mother of the victim and the medical records, prima facie makes out a case against the petitioner for his involvement in committing the alleged offences. Hence, it is not a fit case for exercising the discretion in favour of the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, petition is hereby rejected.
However, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that from the date of arrest the petitioner is in custody, the concerned Sessions Court is hereby directed to take up the matter on priority basis and to dispose of the same as early as possible.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp