High CourtsSingle Bench

Pathalinga @ Pathalinganna S/O Kumar vs State Of Karnataka By Abbinahole Police Represented By State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bangalore 560001 & Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 11 March 2024 · Citation: (2024) 03 KAR CK 0021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Badamikar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 363, 376(2)(n) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4, 6, 17
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 890 Of 2024 (439)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 714 words

Rajendra Badamikar, J

1.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for enlarging him on bail in Spl.C.C.No.147/2023 pending on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Chitradurga arising out of Crime No.148/2023 of Abbinahole Police Station for the offence offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO Act).

2.

The brief case of the prosecution is that, the victim is the daughter of complainant aged about 16 years. It is alleged that on 2.9.2023 at about 7.00 p.m., in Upparahalli Village, the petitioner along with accused no.2, enticed the victim girl and took her in a car bearing Regn.No.KA-05-AJ-1778 and kept her in the house of CWs 4 and 5 situated in Bengaluru and on the night of 7.9.2023 to 11.9.2023, he committed sexual assault on the victim girl repeatedly. Initially, the complainant lodged a missing complaint before the Police stating that his daughter i.e. victim girl was missing and later when she was traced, the petitioner was prosecuted.

3.

The statement of victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.PC is also recorded by the learned Magistrate. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has also submitted the charge sheet. The petitioner was apprehended and produced before the learned Special Judge. The learned Special Judge remanded him to the custody. The petitioner had approached the learned Special/Sessions Judge seeking regular bail and the bail petition filed by him was rejected. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 i.e. father of victim is also present and submits that respondent no.2 has no objection for admitting the petitioner on bail. It is also submitted that the elders have decided to perform the marriage of the victim girl with the petitioner after the victim girl attains the age of majority.

5.

The learned HCGP opposed the bail petition.

6.

The allegations of the prosecution disclose that the petitioner is in love with the victim girl and since there was attempt to perform the marriage of victim girl against her will with some other person, the petitioner enticed her with the assistance of accused no.2 and kept her in his sister's house and had physical relationship with her. The statement of the victim girl discloses that she did not support the case of the prosecution regarding sexual assault but, her evidence discloses that she was enticed by the petitioner and accused no.2. However, now it is submitted that elders have decided to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl after she attains the age of majority.

7.

The petitioner has also submitted an affidavit in this regard.

8.

The investigation is also concluded and charge sheet has been laid down. Though the allegation of kidnapping is alleged against the petitioner, but, it is a case of eloping with the petitioner out of love. Victim girl is capable of understanding. Both the parties have decided to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl after victim girl attains the age of majority.

9.

In that view of the matter, in my opinion, the petitioner can be granted regular bail. The objections raised by the learned HCGP can be meted out by imposing certain conditions. Hence, the petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

(a) The petition is allowed.

(b) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.148/2023 of Abbinahole Police Station, Chitradurga Disrict registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) read with Sections 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO Act), which is pending on the file of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

(i) He shall not indulge in any of the criminal activities.

(ii) He shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.

(iii) He shall co-operate in speedy disposal of the matter.