IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7566 OF 2016 Between Amar C.V.
S/o M.Venkataramaiah Aged about 25 years Residing at Channahalli village Bettakote post Devanahalli taluk Bengaluru Rural District-562110 (By Sri Lokesh S.G., Advocate) And State by Chennarayapatna Police station, Bengaluru District (By Sri K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed u/s 438 of Cr.P.C., by the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.67/2016 of Chennarayapatna police station, Bengaluru District for the offences p/u/s 366A, 376, 342, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of POCSO act.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/state.
2. This petition is filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.67/2016 registered by the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under section 366A, 376, 342, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3, 4 of POCSO Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is delay in lodging the FIR and inconsistencies in the statement of the victim. It is submitted that at one instance, the victim alleges that she was in love with the petitioner and agreed to marry him and in the next breath, she states that voluntarily she had left the house of her parents and stayed in the house of one Gayathri, therefore, there is a prima-facie case to admit the petitioner for anticipatory bail.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that at the first instance, a missing complaint was lodged by the mother of the victim, subsequently, after tracing the said victim, her statement has been recorded wherein the victim has unequivocally stated that the petitioner herein committed forcible rape on her.
5. Records reveal that initially the First Information Report was registered for the offence punishable under section 366A of IPC. But, based on the statement of the victim, the charges under section 376, 342 and 506 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Pocso Act have been incorporated.
6. The allegations made against the petitioner require interrogation of the petitioner. Hence, this is not a fit case to admit the petitioner to anticipatory bail.
The petition is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE Kmv/nc/-