Siddaraju @ Swamy vs State Of Karnataka & Others

K. Natarajan, J

This petition is filed by petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.82/2020 registered by the Terakambi

Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 of IPC, Sections 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 18 of POCSO Act and Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Raju, the father of the victim who filed the complaint before the police on 06.11.2020

alleging that his daughter victim girl who is aged 16 years found missing from the house from 05.11.2020. He suspected that accused might have

abducted her. Subsequently, during the investigation the police arrested this petitioner on 10.11.2020 and he was taken to custody. On 11.11.2020 the

police rescued the victim girl from Chamalapura Hundi. She was subjected to medical examination and later sent to Children Home. The petitioner

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case.

There was love affair between the petitioner and victim. There is no sexual assault on the victim and the statement of victim under Section 164 of

Cr.P.C. does not reveal the alleged offence. 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. 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 no doubt, the father of the victim had lodged the complaint for

abduction. The petitioner was arrested on 10.11.2020 and the victim was rescued on 11.11.2020. As per the statement of victim under Section 164 of

Cr.P.C., she had fallen in love with the accused and went along with him. However, her statement does not reveal about sexual assault made by the

petitioner on her. Even the medical record shows that there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. However, the sexual assault cannot not be

ruled. The opinion is not a conclusive one. The victim has not stated anything about the sexual assault by the petitioner and the age of victim is 16

years 09 months as per the statement made before the police as well as the Magistrate. The investigation is already completed and charge sheet is

filed. The presence of the petitioner may not be required, except for trial.

Looking into facts and circumstances, 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.82/2020 registered by Terakambi Police Station, Gundlupet Circle,

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

iii) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court, without prior permission;

iv) Petitioner shall take trial without causing any delay.