IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7325/2017 BETWEEN:
Sri. Toufiq Ahamed, S/o Muneer Pasha, Aged about 22 years, R/at 1st Cross, Manjunatha Nagar, Shivamogga, Shivamogga District – 577 204.
... Petitioner (By Sri. Prashanth. H.S, Advocate) AND:
State by Women’s Police Station, Kote Circle, Kote, Shivamogga – 577 201. Represented by SPP, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001.
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP) ...Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.144/2016 of Women Police Station, Shivamogga and in S.C No.10/2017 pending on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga for the offence p/u/s 376(D) and 344 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 5(G), 6, 8, 12, 17 and 18 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R This is a petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376D, 370, 342 r/w Sec.34 of IPC and also under Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012, registered in respondent police station Crime No.144/2016 and now after competing investigation charge-sheet came to be filed for the offences punishable under Section 376D, 344 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Section 4, 5(g), 6, 8, 12, 17 and 18 of the POCSO Act.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The counsel for the petitioner made the submission that looking to the prosecution material there is no prima-facie case as against the present petitioner/accused No.2 and there is no role played by the present petitioner in the alleged incident. Counsel also made the submission that the earlier bail petition came to be rejected. But now, investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. From the date of arrest the petitioner is in custody. Hence, the learned counsel made the submission, by imposing reasonable condition he may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP opposes the petition submitting that it is a gang rape committed on the victim girl. The girl in her statement has made it clear about the act committed on her by the present petitioner. Even her statement is recorded as required under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate Court, wherein also she has stated about the alleged act committed on her. Hence, he submitted that in view of said material collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the other materials produced in the case. Looking to the statement of the victim girl which is considered as complaint in this case, she has narrated in detail as to what has happened to her. The material goes to show that when she took the railway ticket by mistake she has proceeded up to Shivamogga. Taking undue advantage that she was waiting alone as she was not knowing anybody, it is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused persons took her in an auto-rickshaw. There afterwards one after other committed rape on her. Her statement before the Court under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. also confirms her statement given in the complaint. Looking to the aspect that the girl is minor in age, the seriousness of the alleged offence committed, I am of the opinion it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the present petitioner/accused No.2.
Hence, the Criminal Petition is hereby rejected Sd/- JUDGE SV