Sri Akram Pasha vs State of Karnataka

Budihal R.B., J.—This is the petition filed by the petitioner/accused No. 1 u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 376(1), 420, 457 and also Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered in respondent police station Crime No. 143/2013.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that looking to the materials placed by the prosecution, the case of the prosecution is also that she was aged about 16 years when the incident took place. Learned counsel submitted that the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of victim girl and looking to her statement, it goes to show that there was acquaintance between the present petitioner and the victim girl since nine months earlier to the alleged incident and the statement of the victim girl also goes to show that the present petitioner came to the house of the victim and asked her to have sexual intercourse with him. When the petitioner told that he is going to marry her and there is no trouble to have the sexual intercourse, then she agreed to have the same. Her statement also goes to show that even she has facilitated the present petitioner to come to her house and they were having the sexual intercourse. Learned counsel made the submission that the girl is of the age of 16 years and consented for the sexual intercourse as alleged in the case, and it goes to show that it is the consensual act and it will not come within the purview of Section 375 of IPC and there is no offence of rape as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel made the submission that the age of the petitioner is not disputed and there is no material placed by the prosecution to show that the girl is below the age of 16 years on the alleged date of incident. He further submitted that since 10 months petitioner is in custody, hence by imposing any reasonable conditions petitioner may be admitted to bail.

As against this, the learned HCGP during the course of his arguments submitted that looking to the statement of the parents and the other witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation, they goes to show the involvement of the present petitioner in the commission of alleged offence. He submitted that she was a minor girl, as per the provisions of POSCO Act and she is still considered to be a child, hence, he made the submission that the alleged act said to have been done by the present petitioner, squarely falls u/s 375 of IPC and hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.

I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, charge sheet material and other materials placed on record. The petitioner has completely denied the allegations made against him as per the complaint and other materials placed by the prosecution. It is the contention of the petitioner that there is false implication of him in this case.

Perusing the statement of Sahana, the victim girl, which was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 16.05.2013, it is clearly stated in the statement that present petitioner was loving her since one year prior to the alleged incident and he was telling that he is going to marry her and because of that reason, both started to love each other. Her statement also goes to show that because of the say made by the petitioner that he is going to marry her, she agreed for having sexual intercourse with him and there afterwards also they continue to have sexual intercourse and in her statement it is mentioned that both together cut the iron rods put to the window of the room of victim girl with axel blade to facilitate the entry of the petitioner to the room of victim girl. Looking to this statement of the victim girl, it clearly goes to show that the alleged act of sexual intercourse with the present petitioner is consensual in nature, so the materials produced in the case supports the contention of the present petitioner as well as the victim girl. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since ten months the petitioner is in custody and is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by this Court. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the present petitioner is entitled to be granted with bail. Hence, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376(1), 420, 457 and also Section 4 and 6 of POSCO Act, 2012, registered in respondent - police station Crime No. 143/2013, subject to the following conditions:

i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs. 25,000/- and has to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. Petitioner has to make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, whenever called for.

iv. Petitioner has to appear before the concerned Court regularly.