IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7915/2018 BETWEEN SRI SALOMAN S/O STEPHEN RAJ AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT NO.1, 16TH CROSS, NEAR MNTI COLLEGE K G HALLI, JALAHALLI WEST, BENGALURU-560 015. ... PETITIONER (BY SMT. CHANDINI S, ADV.) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER BY JALAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI M.DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.88/2018 REGISTERED BY JALAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 366(A) AND 376(2)(l)(n) R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 5(l) AND 6 OF POCSO 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., seeking his release on bail in Crime No.88/2018 of Jalahalli Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A) and 376(2)(l)(n) r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant is residing in a rented house along with his daughter victim and two others and since three years, the accused/petitioner who has already got married came in contact with the victim who was working in a readymade shop. It is further stated that the accused/petitioner was not going properly to his work and used to move along with victim here and there and both were called and advised in this regard. In spite of the same, they used to move and meet secretly. It is further alleged that on 27.05.2018, she went for her work and the victim was alone in the house and when she came back to the house at about 2.30 p.m.. her daughter was not there in the house and after enquiry, she came to know that at about 1.00 p.m., her daughter has left the house by taking the bag and she has also having a suspicion with his son-in-law. The accused/petitioner has eloped the victim with an intention to marry her. When victim was traced, she disclose that under the pretext of marrying her, on 27.05.2018 at about 1.00 p.m. in the afternoon, petitioner came to the house of the victim girl and took her to Yelahanka and from there, they went to Hindupura., There, they stayed in a room and at that time, the accused/petitioner sexually assaulted the victim. Despite her protest, he had committed penetrative sexual assault on her and on the basis of the said statement and after investigation, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner/accused is innocent and he has not committed any offence. She further submitted that the complaint is lodged after two days after coming to know about the fact. She further submitted that the medical documents clearly goes to show that there is no recent sexual intercourse and that itself clearly disclose that she has not been sexually assaulted. It is further submitted that in the medical report it is clearly mentioned that it is Mr.Saloman is the person who sexually assaulted the victim girl. She further submitted that 161 and 164 statement given by the victim is contrary to each other. She further submitted that medial report does not support the case of the prosecution. The petitioner/accused is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer surety. On these grounds, she prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused on anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused has eloped with the victim who is a minor girl and thereafter, against her will, under the false promise of marrying her, he had sexually assaulted the victim. He further submits that 161 Cr.PC and 164 Cr.PC statements given by the victim corroborates with each other. He further submitted that the accused/petitioner is involved in serious offence of sexual assault on minor girl. If the petitioner is released on bail, he may abscond and may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
7. As could be seen from the contents of the complaint, the missing complaint was filed by the mother of the victim on 29.05.2018 alleging that on 27.05.2018 when she came to her house, she noticed that her daughter was not there in the house and missing complaint got registered. The complaint itself goes to show that she made efforts to search her daughter and thereafter, she filed a compliant. Hence, there is no inordinate delay in filing the complaint.
8. Be that as it may, from the medical records, it is clear that victim has been sexually assaulted by the petitioner/accused. The 161 Cr.PC and 164 Cr.PC statements of the victim clearly go to show that the petitioner/accused in the pretext of marrying the victim, took her and kept in a room at Hindupura and thereafter, he committed penetrative sexual assault on victim girl. Even there is corroboration with the medical evidence to show that even hymen is also not intact. Hence, the said act of the accused clearly goes to show that it is a sexual assault committed by the petitioner/accused. Under the said facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has not made out any good grounds to release him on bail.
Hence, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VM CT:HR