IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7243/2017 BETWEEN:
Vijay Kumar @ Viji @ Vijay, S/o. Chandrappa, Aged about 22 years, R/at Barli Village, Bangarpet Taluk, Kolar -563 116. ... Petitioner (By S. G. Vishwanath, Advocate) AND State of Karnataka by SHO, Bethamangala PS, Kolar -563 116.
(BY Sri.K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) ...Respondent This criminal petition is filed under section 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.37/2017 of Bethamangala Police Station, K.G.F and S.C.No.90/2017 now pending on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar for the offence p/u/s 143, 147, 363, 376, 323 r/w 149 of IPC r/w 4, 6 of POCSO Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 363 and 376 read with section 149 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.37/2017.
2. Case of the prosecution in brief as per the complaint averments that the father of the victim girl, the complainant who filed the complaint alleging that his daughter is aged about 16 years, studying Nursing in Devaraj Urs Medical college, Kolar. That on 13.03.2017 at about 7.00 am., when complainant’s daughter went out side, at that time accused No.1 to 5 kidnapped the complainant’s daughter. The complainant and his family members were attempted to rescue their daughter, but the accused persons assaulted the complainant and forcibly kidnapped his daughter. On the basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered against the accused persons for the alleged offences.
3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.1 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge rejecting the bail application of the petitioner, and the other materials placed on record.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submission that looking to the prosecution materials, the victim girl was aged about 18 years as on the date of the alleged incident. He also made submission that the alleged incident took place on 31.03.2017 and the complaint came to be filed on 02.04.2017. There is delay of three days which is not properly explained by the prosecution. Learned counsel also made submission that even looking into the prosecution materials, there is no prima-facie case as against the petitioner and the allegations in the complaint and the statement of the victim girl also will not make out a case of rape under Section 376 of IPC. Learned counsel submitted that this petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case. The investigation is completed, chargesheet is filed. Hence, imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner – accused No.1 may be enlarged on bail. Hence, prays to allow the petition.
6. Per contra, learned Government High Court Pleader made submission that there is no delay in lodging the complaint. The alleged offence took place in the morning hours on 31.03.2017 and the complaint came to be filed on 02.04.2017. So for as one day delay is concerned there is an explanation in the complaint itself. He also made submission about statement of the victim girl, so also statement of the other witnesses, prima-facie case goes to show the offence of kidnapping and also the sexual intercourse on the victim girl by the present petitioner. Hence, he prays to reject the petition.
7. I have perused the complaint dated 02.04.2017 and statement of the victim girl recorded on 20.04.2017 at the stage of investigation. In the statement of victim girl, it is stated that the petitioner approached the victim girl to run away from the place and to marry, but when she disagreed for the same, he forcibly took her on his two wheeler motorcycle. In her statement it is also stated that though her father and other family members tried to rescue her, they were also assaulted by the petitioner and the petitioner took her forcibly and committed sexual intercourse on her in a rented house.
8. I have perused the medical records, the Doctor who has examined the victim girl, has mentioned in the medical records as ‘external genitalia, no injuries found, hymen not intact’. Therefore, the medical records also show prima-facie regarding the sexual intercourse on the victim girl.
9. Looking to the materials on record I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant bail. Accordingly, petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE MR