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 CRL.P. NO. 5448/2019 BETWEEN RAMESHA AGED 22 YEARS S/O LATE KARIYAPPA RESIDING AT KEERABEEDI KURUPETE, KANAKAPURA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT -562 126 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.V. SREE RAMAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SATHANUR POLICE STATION KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 126 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.227/2016 REGISTERED BY SATHNOOR POLICE STATION, RAMANAGARA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/Ss. 366 AND 343 OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the Respondent –State. Perused the records.
2. Respondent No.2 (Victim) is present before the Court.
3. The respondent-Sathnoor Police, Ramanagara District, have registered a case in Crime No.227/2016 against the petitioner initially for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 343 of IPC and later during investigation, they have incorporated the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. The allegations made against the petitioner in brief are that, the complainant who is no other than the father of the victim girl by name Shivaraj has lodged a complaint stating that, his daughter-Kum. Sunitha (victim girl) aged 16 years, on 09.12.2016 at 8.00 a.m. left the house in order to go to college at Kanakapura, but she did not return home. In spite of his best efforts, he could not trace her. Therefore, he lodged a complaint before the respondent-police making the aforesaid allegations.
5. During the course of investigation, the police have secured only the victim girl as the accused/petitioner herein was absconding. After coming to know that the police are searching for him, the petitioner has filed a petition before this Court for grant of Anticipatory Bail. The statements of the victim girl were recorded by the police. Initially she implicated the petitioner/accused for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act along with other offences. But, subsequently when her statement was recorded before the Jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 164(5) of Cr.PC., she categorically stated that, she fell in love with the petitioner and that they were loving each other, but her parents were contemplating to perform her marriage with some other boy, against her wish. In this context it is stated that, she herself persuaded the petitioner to take her away and as such, she voluntarily went along with the petitioner. Thereafter, she came to know that her father has lodged a complaint. She has specifically stated that, the accused has not done anything to her and he took her along with him only at her instance. Subsequently, the police have recorded her further statement in which she has stated that, she has already married the petitioner and they have been living as husband and wife even as on today.
6. It appears, as on today, the victim girl has also attained the age of majority. Therefore, looking to the circumstances of the case and also the nature of allegations and inconsistency in the statements of the victim girl, in my opinion the aspect, whether the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused would fall under Section 363 or under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, has to be tested during the course of full-dressed trial. As on today, at the most, the offence may attract Section 363 of IPC. Therefore, attraction of Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act, has to be ascertained during the course of trial. Even if the said provisions attracts, they are not punishable either with the sentence of death or life imprisonment. It appears that the marriage has already been taken place between the petitioner and the victim girl, which is stubbornly disclosed by the victim girl, who is very much personally present before the Court. Therefore, in the above said circumstances, treating this as a very strange and special case, the Court inclines to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner/accused with certain conditions. Hence, the following,-
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused-Ramesha shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.227 of 2016 of Sathanoor Police Station, Ramanagara District, on following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-
sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Ramanagara District without prior permission of the Court, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week ie, on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*