IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.3122/2019 BETWEEN:
Balaji, S/o Armugam, Aged about 26 years, R/at # 226, Om Shakthi Nagar, High Tension Road, Near Vishwabharathi School, Kalyan Nagar, Mudalpalya, Bangalore – 560 032. ... Petitioner (By Sri. M. Krishne Gowda, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, Reptd. by Vijayanagar P.S., High Court Government Pleader, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.621/2018 (Spl. C. No.83/2019) of Vijayanagar P.S., Bangalore for the offences p/u/s 363, 376, 366A of IPC and Sections 6, 4 of POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.621/2018 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 and 366A of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint was lodged by the father of the victim stating that his daughter was missing from the home and had not come back and that despite enquiries and efforts, he could not trace the victim. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR was registered, investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is a consensual relationship and the said factor ought to be taken note of atleast as a mitigating circumstance. Attention is also drawn to the version of the victim in the statement recoded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., wherein it is pointed out that the petitioner and the victim had physical relationship voluntarily. It is stated that proof of offence is a matter for trial and as the petitioner has been in custody since 16.12.2018, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. For the purpose of present proceedings, prima-facie perusal of the statement recorded under Secton164 Cr.P.C., would indicate that there was consensual relationship between the petitioner and the victim. No doubt, consent of the victim would be irrelevant however, noticing that present proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in nature and that proof of offence is a matter for trial and noticing that petitioner is in custody since 16.12.2018, petitioner is enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
5. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.621/2018 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 and 366A of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE Np/-