IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4958/2019 BETWEEN:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHAMARAJANAGAR EAST POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-01.
(BY SRI., ROHITH B.J., HCGP.) AND:
NAVEEN S/O MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDING AT S.C. STREET SIDDAIAHNAPURA VILLAGE CHAMARAJNAGAR TALUK-571313.
(BY SRI.DALITRAJ M, ADV.) …PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439(2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CANCEL THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:03.11.2018 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.497/2018 ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGARA, GRATING ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE ACCUSED NO.1/RESPONDENT IN CR.NO.331/2018 OF CHAMARAJANAGARA EAST POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 363 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 12 AND 17 OF POCSO ACT AND CANCEL THE SAID ORDER OF BAIL AND DIRECT THAT THE ACCUSED NO.1/RESPONDENT TO BE ARRESETED AND COMMITTED TO CUSTODY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The State has come up with this petition seeking for cancellation of bail granted by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar vide order dated 3.11.2018 in Crl.Mis.No.497/2018, under which order, anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 363 of IPC and Sections 12 and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The brief facts of the case are that a person by name Basavanna lodged a complaint stating that his daughter was studying in Government First Grade College in I Year B.A. The petitioner-accused was also of the same village i.e., Siddaiahanapura Village of Chamarajanagar and he often used to tease the victim girl to go along with him. In this context, it is alleged that he persuaded the victim girl and took her along with him. It appears that thereafter she was traced with the accused. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed. There is no allegation of any violation of any of the conditions imposed by the Trial Court on the petitioner for cancellation of bail.
3. Even the learned HCGP submitted that after filing of the charge sheet, the provisions of law are not changed and there is no allegation of any sexual activity between the victim girl and the petitioner. The offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC and Sections 12 and 17 of POCSO Act are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The bail order was passed on 3.11.2018 and one year has already been lapsed. There is no allegation that the petitioner at any point of time has hampered with the investigation or tampered prosecution witnesses and violated any conditions.
4. Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, the discretionary order passed by the Trial Court based on the materials available on record, normally cannot be interfered with unless there is any strong circumstance occurred after granting of the bail order. Hence, the petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE DM