Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 428 (KAR)

Nagaraju, S/o Giddaiah v. State of Karnataka

2017-02-08

P.S.DINESH KUMAR

body2017
ORDER : Based on a complaint lodged by the Child Development Project Officer, Channapatna, an FIR is registered in Crime No. 233/2016 by the Channapatna Rural Police against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of Child Marriage Restraint Act. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this court by this petition. 2. Heard, Sri.Chandrashekara K.A., learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complaint lodged by the Child Development Project Officer is false as no marriage was celebrated on 27.05.2016 at Dharmasthala as alleged in the complaint. On the other hand, marriage has been registered on 03.02.2017 before the marriage officer and Sub-Registrar, Channapatna. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false case has been foisted against him and prays for allowing this petition. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP opposing the bail submits that the child involved is minor and matter requires investigation. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed for perusal of this Court the certified copy of Marriage Registration certificate dated 03.02.2016 issued by the Registrar of Marriage which testifies that the petitioner is stated to have married as per Hindu Rights on 03.02.2017. A joint photograph of both husband and wife is also affixed on the certificate. 6. The complaint by the Child Development Project Officer dated 30.05.2016 is to the effect that the petitioner was married on 27.05.2016. In the light of the fact that there is a certificate issued by competent authority certifying that the marriage was conducted on 03.02.2017. 7. In the circumstances, in my view, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that: (i) In the event of arrest or voluntary surrender of petitioner before the jurisdictional Police or Magistrate on or before 20/02/2017, he shall be released on bail upon his executing a self bond for a sum of Rs. 7. In the circumstances, in my view, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that: (i) In the event of arrest or voluntary surrender of petitioner before the jurisdictional Police or Magistrate on or before 20/02/2017, he shall be released on bail upon his executing a self bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer; (ii) Petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation and appear as and when called upon; (iii) Petitioner shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional Police on every 1st and 3rd Sunday between 10 a.m. & 1 p.m till the charge sheet is filed; (iv) Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witness or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer; (v) Petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities; and (vi) If the petitioner violates any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. Petition allowed.