IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.938/2019 BETWEEN:
Sri Tippu Khan, S/o Shahansha, Aged about 26 years, Resident of 2nd Cross, 2nd Main, Metro Layout, Nayandanahalli, Bangalore – 560 039. ... Petitioner (By Sri Naushad Pasha, Advocate) AND:
State by Chandralayout Police, Bangalore – 560 072, Represented by S.P.P., High Court of Karnataka, High Court Building, Bangalore – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.230/2018 (Spl. C.C. No.502/2018) of Chandra Layout Police Station, Bangalore City for the offences p/u/s 366, 417, 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.230/2018 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 366, 417, 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint was filed by the victim contending that the petitioner has breached the promise to marry her and has committed the offence of rape insofar as he had sexual intercourse by promising that he would marry her. It comes out from the complaint that victim was known to the petitioner as he used to come and meet his friends who are neighbours of the petitioner. It is stated that they fell in love with each other and the petitioner had promised that he would marry her in the month of Ramzan. It is stated that on 12.04.2018, the complainant came near the house of CW.12 and the petitioner took her inside the house, enticed her with promise to marry and had sexual intercourse with her. It is stated that this was repeated on 16.04.2018 as well. It is stated that the petitioner has refused to marry the complainant when she asked him to marry her. Therefore, complaint came to be lodged against the petitioner on 10.05.2018. The investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. It is stated that petitioner is in custody since 10.05.2018.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the story of the complainant is not believable insofar as allegations made regarding act of sexual intercourse in the month of April, 2018. When the medical examination was conducted on 10.05.2018, it is stated that she had conceived and was in thirty-second week of pregnancy and hence it is contended that the version of prosecution as made out in the complaint is not believable. It is noticed that evidence of prime witnesses viz., PW’s.1 to 4 has been completed. PW.1 is the victim and PW.3 is the mother of victim. PW’s.2 and 4 are the mahazar witnesses.
4. Taking note of the fact that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed, the question as to whether petitioner has held out promise to marry and on the basis of such promise had enticed the complainant to have sexual intercourse with him is a matter to be proved during trial.
5. The learned Sessions Judge had rejected the application of the petitioner and had observed that evidence of PW.1 was not complete. In the light of fact that evidence of PW.1 as well as PW.3 is complete, the case is made out for enlarging the petitioner on bail.
6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.230/2018 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 366, 417, 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE Np/-