Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1482 (KAR)

Kumara @ Gandadhakaddi v. State of Karnataka

2017-11-09

R.B.BUDIHAL

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offence punishable under Section 366A of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.42/2017. 2. After recording statement of the victim girl, the other witnesses were also inquired in the said case. The investigating officer after conducting investigation, filed charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 366(a), 376(n), 506 of IPC r/w. Sections 4, 8, 11(iv), 12 of POCSO Act. 3. The mother of the victim girl is the complainant of this case. She has filed the complaint stating that the victim girl went out of the house stating that she would go to the school as there was examination. It is further stated that she did not come back and therefore, the complaint came to be filed by the mother of the victim girl. After return of the victim girl, her statement came to be recorded on 11.5.2017 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner made submission that looking to the statement of the victim girl given before the court, she has not stated anything about the alleged forcible sexual intercourse on her. This prima facie goes to show that the alleged offence under section 376 IPC will not attract in the case. He made submission that even medical records are also not supporting the prosecution case. He submitted that investigation of the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. 6. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent State made submission that looking to the statement of the victim girl recorded by the investigating officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C., she has clearly stated in her statement that she after writing the examination, she came out of the college. The petitioner who was present there told that if she goes to the house, her parents will perform her marriage with somebody and hence, he took her along with him to different places. It is also stated in her statement that the petitioner dragged the victim girl towards himself, then he started touching her chest and kissing her. The petitioner who was present there told that if she goes to the house, her parents will perform her marriage with somebody and hence, he took her along with him to different places. It is also stated in her statement that the petitioner dragged the victim girl towards himself, then he started touching her chest and kissing her. Even though she protested for the same, he removed her clothes and pressing the chest. With his left hand, he touched her private part and at that time, though the victim girl told that it is not proper, even then he did not hear to her words and he committed sexual intercourse on her. Because of the fear, she started to weep, for that, the petitioner told that nothing will happen. 7-8 days thereafter, he committed similar act on her. 7. I have perused the medical records. The doctor who examined the victim girl has mentioned in his report regarding genital examination of the victim girl that, so far the hymen is concerned, it is absent. I have also perused the statement of the other witnesses. Looking to their statement also, they go show that the petitioner had kidnapped the victim girl. Prima facie, this goes to show the involvement of the petitioner in committing the offence under section 376 of IPC. The victim girl is aged about 16 years as mentioned in her statement so also in the medical records. Considering all these materials on record, I am of the opinion that it is not the fit case to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is rejected.