Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 7 (KAR)

Parameshwar @ Pammya @ Pramod v. State

2020-01-02

H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. The present petitioner who is an accused in Crime No.164/2019 of respondent/complainant police station which complaint is registered for the offences punishable under sections 354, 504, 506, 509 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as IPC) and sections 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as POCSO Act) has filed this petition seeking the relief of regular bail under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter for brevity referred to as Cr.P.C.). 2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that the complainant girl was being teased and harassed by this accused on several occasions while she is said to have been travelling by bus between her residence from Kallabennur village and Government High School, Shahabazar, Kalaburagi to attend to her high school studies. It is also alleged that the advice made to the accused did not yield any result, rather the accused was openly stating that he is in love with the complainant and expect the reciprocity by the complainant also. The police have registered a case against the petitioner for the above said offences. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the complaint is accepted on its prima facie allegations, still the same would not make out a case under sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act. 4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader, who like in other cases, have not filed their statement of objections to the petition, has submitted that the complainant is none else than the aggrieved girl, as such, her complaint cannot be disbelieved at this stage. He further submits that her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. has also been recorded which also reveals that she has made serious allegations against the petitioner. 5. A prima facie reading of the complaint at this stage would go to show that the complainant who is said to be a girl of 15 years old has alleged that while she was going to her school by travelling in a public transport, the accused was following her and pestering her to love. She has also alleged that accused secured her cell phone number and used to call her during the absence of her parents at home and was compelling her to love him. She has also alleged that accused secured her cell phone number and used to call her during the absence of her parents at home and was compelling her to love him. It is further alleged that the advice given to the accused from the elders in the locality also did not yield any result. Even after taking the above important allegations made in the complaint, as true, still a question arises whether they themselves would attract sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act. The same would require a detailed trial in case the charge sheet is filed in the matter by Investigating Officer. The accused is said to be in judicial custody since one and half month. Thus, I am of the view that imposing a reasonable restriction, the accused be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner be enlarged on bail in Crime No.164/2019 of University Police Station, Kalaburagi for the offences punishable under sections 354, 504, 506, 509 read with section 34 of IPC and sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the enlarging. (ii) The petitioner to give in writing about the change in his address, if any, to the Investigating Officer as and when such change occurs and obtain acknowledgement in that regard. (iii) He shall appear before the Court on all the dates of hearing. (iv) He shall not hamper or tamper the prosecution witnesses and documents in any manner.