High CourtsSingle Bench

Sharath @ Sharathkumar vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 12 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 KAR CK 0011

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.P. Sandesh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366(A), 376 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4, 6 · Prohibition Of Child Marriage Act, 2006 — Section 9, 10, 11
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 8078 Of 2021
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

26 paragraphs · 442 words

H.P. Sandesh, J

1.

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.102/2021 of Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru,

for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376, 366(A) of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 9 and 10 of Prohibition of

Child Marriage Act and Section 11 Child Marriage Restraint Act.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State.

3.

The factual matrix of the case is that accused No.1 on 23.03.2021 kidnapped a minor girl and married her at the assistance of this petitioner and

other accused persons and accused No.1 subjected her for sexual act and police have investigated the matter and filed charge sheet arraigning this

petitioner as accused No.5.

4.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits except allegation against this petitioner that he assisted accused No.1 in kidnapping her and marrying her, no

other allegations are made. Main accused is already enlarged on bail and other accused persons are also enlarged on bail. Hence, petitioner may be

enlarged on bail.

5.

Per contra, learned HCGP submits charges levelled against this petitioner is he helped accused No.1 in kidnapping minor girl and marrying said girl.

Hence, it is not a fit case for granting bail.

6.

Having taken note of the factual aspects and main accused already been enlarged on bail and other accused persons are also enlarged on bail and

the only allegation against this petitioner is that he helped accused No.1 in kidnapping minor girl. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise discretion.

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.102/2021

registered by Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376, 366(A) of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of

POCSO Act and Sections 9 and 10 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and Section 11 Child Marriage Restraint Act, subject to the following

conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and

shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the

concerned Investigating Officer.

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till the disposal of the case.