Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1540 (KAR)

Manjunath v. State Of Karnataka

2020-08-06

K.SOMASHEKAR

body2020
JUDGMENT K Somashekar, J. - This is a petition filed by the petitioner / accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in S.C.No.25/2020 arising out of Crime No.199/2019 of Vemagal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 363, 376 and 506 of IPC and so also the offences under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The accused is in judicial custody. Therefore, the counsel is praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail for the grounds urged therein. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and so also the learned HCGP for the State appearing through video conferencing. 3. It is stated in the theory of the prosecution referring to the FIR said to be recorded by the police for the alleged offences, that the prosecutrix who is the victim aged about 19 years had given a complaint on 25.11.2019 alleging that while she was returning from her College at around 5.00 p.m. in the evening, near Chitanahalli Gate, the accused who had come in his motor bile had requested her to come along with him under the pretext of dropping the said victim girl to her village. Thereafter, the accused had taken her near Shettimadamangala village at around 6.00 p.m. to the forest area. Despite of protest made by the victim girl, the accused had ravished her or otherwise to say, had committed sexual intercourse on the victim by extending threat not to disclose the incident, or else she would face dire consequences. Therefore, she filed a complaint two days later, i.e., only on 27.11.2019. Based upon the complaint, the crime came to be registered for the aforesaid offences. Thereafter, the case has been taken up for investigation by the I.O. and thoroughly investigation done by the I.O. and during investigation, he recorded the statement of witnesses and so also drew the mahazar and so also collected the material documents relating to the victim girl who had given a statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and also was subjected to medical examination by the Doctor. The heinous offences committed by the accused are reflected in the substance of the charge-sheet and so also the material collected by the I.O. 4. The heinous offences committed by the accused are reflected in the substance of the charge-sheet and so also the material collected by the I.O. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the accused / petitioner during the course of arguments that the accused is an innocent person and he has not at all committed the alleged offences. Despite of which the complaint has been filed by the complainant against the accused alleging that he had forcibly taken her to the forest area and committed rape on her or otherwise to say, had ravished her. But, there is no injury inflicted on the person of the victim. Though after two days, the complaint came to be filed by her, but there is no satisfactory explanation made in the complaint. It is stated that the complaint has been filed by persons who are in inimical terms with the accused. This contention is taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in addition to that, the Doctor who examined the victim had opined that there were no visible injuries sustained on her body and the clothes worn by her were not torn. The clothes were also not stained with mud or dirt on her back. The material collected by the I.O. in order to lay the charge-sheet does not disclose the offences lugged against the accused. Even there is no material relating to spermatozoa or any blood stains on the clothes. Even to that extent she did not satisfactorily explain in her complaint relating to delay in recording the statement of witnesses by the I.O. Further, no incriminating material has been collected relating to the offences lugged against the accused. It is further contended that though the petitioner has not committed the alleged offences, but he is in judicial custody since the date of his arrest and nothing has been recovered at the instance of the accused and his family consists of his wife and two children and so also old aged parents. If the accused is kept behind bars for a longer period, the family members would lose their breadwinner to eke out their life. If the accused is kept behind bars for a longer period, the family members would lose their breadwinner to eke out their life. The paramount consideration which is required to be taken for consideration of grant of bail is, the availability of the accused for facing of trial and so also the antecedents of the accused and whether any prejudice would be caused to fair trial in respect of the allegation made against the accused in the charge-sheet and also the complaint filed by her. These are all materials which requires to be considered in respect of granting of bail to the accused. 5. Lastly, the counsel submitted that the accused is by avocation an agriculturist and he is the only breadwinner in the family to eke out their livelihood and his presence is very much required to look after his old aged father who is suffering from Ischemic heart disease since three years. The ailment has reached a serious stage. Therefore, the accused is required to be present in the family to look after the ailment of his father. These are all the contentions as taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for grant of regular bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned HCGP for the State has taken me through the FIR said to be recorded by the police and thereafter proceeded with the case for investigation and laid the charge-sheet for the alleged offences. But the victim had been subjected to medical examination and so also the victim being a College going student and aged about 17 years, the evidence reveals of recent signs of sexual intercourse and hence the Doctor has issued necessary certificate. This material finds place in the record relating to the case in Cr.No.199/2019. During the course of investigation, the clothes which were worn by her has been seized by the I.O. and a mahazar was conducted. The age of the victim as on the date of the offence committed by the accused as per the age certificate is that she is 17 years and 18 days. The said certificate was also collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. Whereas the Doctor who subjected to examination the victim girl and issued the certificate reveals that there was history of sexual assault on 25.11.2019 at about 6.30 p.m. by the person namely, Manjunath. Hymen ruptured; sperm sent for FSL. The said certificate was also collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. Whereas the Doctor who subjected to examination the victim girl and issued the certificate reveals that there was history of sexual assault on 25.11.2019 at about 6.30 p.m. by the person namely, Manjunath. Hymen ruptured; sperm sent for FSL. These materials also were collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. This accused has committed the heinous offence on the victim girl and also extended life threat to the victim girl that if she disclosed the said act committed by him, she would have to face dire consequences. Therefore, the complaint came to be filed by the victim on 27.11.2019. If the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of the prosecution case and destroy the evidence, cannot be ruled out. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the State and seeking for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the accused. 7. It is in this context of the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and so also the counter made by the learned HCGP for the State, the allegations made in the complaint against the accused in Cr.No.199/2019 requires to be referred. But paramount consideration requires to be taken relating to the bail petition filed by the accused with regard to the nature and gravity of the accusation made against the accused and so also the role of the accused as well as the availability of the accused to face trial and looking into the material available on record. But in the instant case, the accused had ravished the victim girl who is aged about 17 years and also being a college going student studying II PUC at Government Girls PU College, Kolar. On 25.11.2019 while the victim girl was returning from College to go to her village and while she was waiting for the bus at Chitnahalli Gate to go to her village, the petitioner who is arraigned as accused had come in his motor bike and on the pretext that he would drop the victim girl to her village, had taken her near Shetty Madamangala at about 6.00 p.m., to the forest area near Jambapura. Despite of a protest made by the victim girl, that he had forcible sexual intercourse with the victim girl by extending life threat. The same has been revealed in the material collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. Subsequent to committing the heinous offence of rape on the victim girl, the accused took her in his motor cycle and dropped her near the temple of Goddess Maramma in her village. On seeing the victim girl, her father took her to house and made an enquiry with the victim girl. She had narrated the heinous incident committed by the accused on the victim girl who is a college-going student. Thereafter, after two days, the complaint has been filed by the complainant by narrating the incident. Based upon the complaint filed by the complainant, the case in Cr.No.199/2019 came to be registered for the offences under Sections 307, 363, 376 and 506 of the IPC and also inclusive of the offences under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, where the accused is required to face trial in S.C.No.25/2020. It is relevant to refer the act made by the accused against the victim who is a college-going student. During the course of investigation, the I.O. has recorded the statement of CW-2 Lakshminarasimhappa, CW-3 / Gowramma who are the parents of the victim. CW-4 / Rama and CW-5 / Nandana were members of Child Welfare Committee. Their statements have been recorded by the I.O. during the course of investigation. But the accused is required to face trial in respect of the alleged offences and the prosecution is required to establish their case whether the accused has committed the alleged offences or not. But, it can be established only on a fullfledged trial on the alleged offences and so also the witnesses have to be subjected to cross-examination to prove the guilt of the accused. But the victim is none other than a college-going student, that too studying II PUC and this accused is a married person having two children and so also old aged father. But he having committed heinous offence on the victim girl, that itself indicates the act of the accused since he has ravished the girl, or to say, had forcible sexual intercourse on the victim girl by taking her to the forest area. But he having committed heinous offence on the victim girl, that itself indicates the act of the accused since he has ravished the girl, or to say, had forcible sexual intercourse on the victim girl by taking her to the forest area. Therefore, it is said that the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner do not have any substance for consideration of the bail petition filed by the accused. It is further stated that during the course of investigation, the I.O. has conducted the mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses in the aforesaid crime and so also collected the material documents relating to the heinous offences committed by this accused on the victim girl. If the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly there shall be an adverse impact on the society. Whatever the grounds urged in this petition and whatever the material which has been collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation needs to be subjected to test during the course of securing the witness for trial in order to prove the guilt of the accused. Therefore, at this stage, it is said that the accused is not deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner / accused under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.