Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 483 (KAR)

Bikas Barman v. State of Karnataka

2014-04-23

R.B.BUDIHAL

body2014
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Section 5(M) read with Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 376(2)F read with Section 511 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.298/2013. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, during the course of the arguments, submitted that there is no material placed by the prosecution to show that the petitioner has committed the alleged offence on the victim girl. He has also submitted that the medical report is also not supporting the case of the prosecution. Investigation of the case is completed and the charge sheet is also filed. Therefore, by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. 4. As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, during the course of the arguments, submitted that looking to the statement of the victim girl, who is aged only five years at the time of incident and also the statement of the other witnesses, it is clear that the petitioner has committed the alleged offence. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the other materials on record. 6. Looking to the statement of the victim girl, she has stated in her statement about the sexual act done on her by the petitioner. Her statement also goes to show that when she was playing in front of the house, the petitioner came to her, which was seen by the mother of the victim girl. The mother of the victim enquired the petitioner as to what was he doing and he said that he was kissing the victim girl. When the mother enquired her daughter separately, she narrated the whole story as to the act done by the petitioner. The statement of the victim girl as also the statement of the other witnesses recorded by the investigating officer during investigation goes to show prima facie the alleged offence said to have been committed by the petitioner on the victim girl. The statement of the victim girl as also the statement of the other witnesses recorded by the investigating officer during investigation goes to show prima facie the alleged offence said to have been committed by the petitioner on the victim girl. It is no doubt true that so far as the medical opinion is concerned, it is not supporting the case of the prosecution. But when the girl aged five years has narrated the whole story regarding the incident before her mother, which is supported by the statement of other witnesses recorded by the investigating officer during investigation, it cannot be said that the prosecution has not placed prima facie materials against the petitioner. Therefore, looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. The petition is accordingly rejected.