Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 457 (KAR)

Venkataravana v. State of Karnataka

2023-03-16

V SRISHANANDA

body2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER V Srishananda, J. - Heard Sri Jagadisha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinayaka V.S., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State. Sri Raghavendra A.S., counsel for respondent No.2 is absent. 2. Petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., with the following prayer: 'Wherefore, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this bail petition and enlarge the petitioner on bail in Spl.S.C.No.147/2021 of respondent Gudibande police, for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (n) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 5 (J) (II), 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act, pending trial before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, at Chikkaballapura, in the interest of justice and equity.' 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: Accused/petitioner has been charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under Section 5(J)(II), 5(L) POCSO Act and he is facing the trial. During the course of the trial, the victim girl has been examined and she has completely turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and did not depose anything about the forcible intercourse, even went to the extent of denying the acquaintance of the accused/petitioner. 4. Though the learned Special Public Prosecutor treated the victim girl as hostile witness and cross-examined in detail and confronting the statement said to have been made by her before the Investigating Officer, no useful material is elicited in such cross-examination, whereby there are no minimum ingredients available on record to proceed against the accused for the alleged offences. As such, the minimum ingredients to attract the offences alleged against the petitioner are not available on record. 5. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the accused in judicial custody is no longer warranted. Accordingly, this Court passed the following: ORDER (1) The criminal petition is allowed. (2) The Petitioner shall be enlarged on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-[Rupees one lakhs only] with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge. (3) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper the prosecution evidence or hamper the investigation process in any manner. (4) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Chikkaballapura District without prior permission. (5) Petitioner shall attend the court regularly. (3) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper the prosecution evidence or hamper the investigation process in any manner. (4) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Chikkaballapura District without prior permission. (5) Petitioner shall attend the court regularly. (6) The petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences. Violation of any of the above conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. Ordered accordingly.