Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Vijay S vs The State Of Karnataka By Station

High Court Of Karnataka|10 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6551 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI. VIJAY S AGE 19 YEARS S/O G. SHEKHAR R/AT. No.56, 11TH MAIN 6TH CROSS, K.G. HALLI JALAHALLI WEST BANGALORE-560015.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHAMMED ARIF KHAN MAKKI, ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER GANGAMMANAGUDI POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560090 REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001.
(BY SRI. ROHITH B.J. HCGP) - - -
… RESPONDENT This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in CR.No.58/2019 (SPL.C.C.No.876/2019) of Gangammana Gudi P.S. Bengaluru City for the offence P/U/S 376 of IPC and Section 4 and 6 of Posco Act.
This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State and perused the records.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.58/2019 of Gangammanagudi Police Station. Thereafter, charge sheet has been laid against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and also under Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
3. The records disclose that as on the date of commission of offence, the victim was below the age of 17 years and victim has also stated that they were having some relationship with each other even earlier to the incident. But the statement of victim also shows that on the date of incident on 05.02.2019, the accused has forcibly ravished her and subsequently on 09.02.2019 he had sexual intercourse with her even against her wishes.
4. Even otherwise, in my opinion, the consent of victim is no consent in the eye of law. Be that as it may, as evidence has commenced and PW-1 has been examined, it is not a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed. However, accused has been in judicial custody since the date of his arrest. Therefore, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and dispose of the case itself as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE RV
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Vijay S vs The State Of Karnataka By Station

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 October, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra