Rangaswamy vs State By Channagiri Police Station

K. Natarajan, J

This petition is filed by petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.287/2020 registered by Channagiri

Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 366(A) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent â€" State. Though Respondent No.2 is served, remained absent.

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Smt.Shobha, the mother of the victim who filed the complaint before the police on

21.09.2020 alleging that her daughter aged 15 years was missing from the house from 15.09.2020 and she was not able to trace her. Subsequently, the

police apprehended the petitioner and the victim girl on the same day and the petitioner/accused was remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner

approached the Sessions Judge for bail, which came to be rejected. Hence, petitioner is before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of

her mother, the place of occurrence differs from each other. The mother has stated the place of occurrence as Bangalore, but whereas the victim girl

has stated that it is in house of Accused at Siddana Matha and the victim herself went along with the accused due to love affairs. The petitioner is in

custody since six months. The police have already completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet. Therefore, the presence of the petitioner is

no more required by the Police. The petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for granting of bail.

Learned High Court Government Pleader seriously objected for grant of bail and prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.

Upon hearing the arguments and perusal of the records, which goes to show that of course, the complaint came to be filed after one week of the

incident where the victim was found missing from the house from 15.09.2020. The statement of victim under Section 161 shows that she went along

with the accused in a motor cycle and he took her to his friends house and stayed there for one week and later came to be known by her mother and

the aunt of the accused brought them to the police station and surrendered there. The 164 Statement recorded by the Magistrate is very cryptic which

shows that the accused took her to his aunt’s house forcibly. But in the 161 statement she has stated that she went herself along with the

accused. The accused is in custody from 21.09.2020. The investigation is completed and charge sheet has already been filed. The counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to marry after the victim completes 18 years.

Looking into facts and circumstances, the presence of the petitioner may not be required for the purpose of investigation, except for trial. Therefore,

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, if the petitioner is granted bail by imposing certain conditions, no prejudice would be caused

to the case of the prosecution. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

The criminal petition is allowed.

The trial Court is directed to release the petitioner- accused on bail in Crime No.287/2020 registered by Channagiri Police Station, for the offences

punishable under Sections 376, 366(A) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the trial

Court;

ii) Petitioner strictly shall not indulge in similar offences;

iii) Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;

iv) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court, without prior permission.