Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1728 (KAR)

Manjunath v. State Of Karnataka

2020-09-04

B.A.PATIL

body2020
JUDGMENT B.A.Patil, J. - This petition is filed by the accused under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying to release him on bail in Crime No.189/2018 of Kukkeri Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 376 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. 2. I have heard Sri K.Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner virtually and Sri Divakar Maddur, learned HCGP for the respondent State. 3. The victim has filed a complaint alleging that she was studying in PUC-I Year Arts in S.K. College, Hukkeri and the petitioner-accused used to follow her by telling that he loves her. The petitioner-accused took her to some places for wandering and on noticing the same, the members of the family of the victim warned him, but he did not stop the same and continued his affair with her. In the first week of September, the petitioner-accused asked the victim to come to his house to talk something and accordingly she went to his house at about 12.30 p.m. At that time, except the petitioner-accused, there was nobody else in the house. The petitioner-accused talked with her for sometime and had a physical contact with her for two times and subsequently after lapse of three days, again he called her to his house and again had a physical contact with her. Later, he requested the victim not to disclose anything to anybody. It is alleged that on 11.10.2018 at about 4.00 p.m., she left the house of her parents and in this regard a complaint came to be filed by her parents. After filing of the complaint, the police secured her, but as she was not ready to go with her parents, she was sent to Women Health Care Centre at Belagavi. On repeated enquiry made by the said Organization, she revealed all the facts and a complaint has been registered. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is a delay of 62 days in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that earlier the petitioner herein had approached this Court for grant of bail in Criminal Petition No.101192/2019. While dismissing the said petition on 17.7.2019, this Court has given a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after the victim is examined before the trial Court. It is his further submission that earlier the petitioner herein had approached this Court for grant of bail in Criminal Petition No.101192/2019. While dismissing the said petition on 17.7.2019, this Court has given a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after the victim is examined before the trial Court. It is his further submission that the victim is examined before the trial Court on 7.1.2020 and she has not supported the case of the prosecution and she has turned hostile. Under such circumstances, there is no material as against the petitioner-accused and therefore he is entitled to be released on bail. The petitioneraccused is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and he is ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, the learned HCGP has vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused has sexually assaulted the victim under the guise of loving her, who is a minor girl. It is his further submission that other witnesses have to be examined and at this juncture, if the petitioner-accused is ordered to be released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and he may abscond. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. On close reading of the earlier order dated 17.7.2019 passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.101192/2019 a liberty was given to the petitioneraccused to file a fresh bail application after the victim is examined before the Court. The records would indicate that the victim has been examined before the trial Court on 7.1.2020 and she has not supported the case of the prosecution in its entirety. When she has not supported the case of the prosecution, I am of the considered opinion that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail by imposing some stringent conditions, it would meet the ends of justice. Though the learned HCGP has expressed his anxiety that other witnesses are to be examined, the same may be taken care of by imposing some conditions. Though the learned HCGP has expressed his anxiety that other witnesses are to be examined, the same may be taken care of by imposing some conditions. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner herein is enlarged on bail in SC.No.462/2018, pending on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi (arising out of Crime No.189/2018 of Kukkeri Police Station) for the offences punishable under Section 376 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions:- i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly. iii) He shall be regular in attending the trial. If he jumps the attendance, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail. iv) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.