The main legal point established is that while the victim's age prevented her from giving legal consent, the voluntary nature of her actions and the absence of evidence supporting forcible sexual assault influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking to be enlarged on bail in respect of Kushtagi P.S. Crime No.168/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 354(A), 354(D), 376, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012, pending before the District and Sessions/Special Judge Koppal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Sharanappa Yamanappa Talawar, the complainant is stated to be the father of the victim, is a resident of Kurubanal village of Kushtagi Taluka of Koppal District. He lodged a complaint on 24.08.2019 at about 9.15 p.m., stating that his daughter who was aged about 16 years had left the school for last three years and was doing the agricultural work. The petitioner who is also residing in the same village developed intimacy with her, the complainant had called upon the parents of the petitioner and requested them to instruct the petitioner not to behave in such a manner. On 21.08.2019 at about 4.00 a.m., the petitioner is stated to have kidnapped the victim from their house stating that he is going to marry her and he will take care of her.

3. On finding that the victim was missing from the house, the complainant and his wife went to the house of the petitioner to enquire about the petitioner as also the whereabouts of the victim. Thereafter, after consultation with the elders of the village, the above complaint came to be file which was registered as Crime No.168/2019 in respect thereof.

4. The Kushtagi police have arrested the petitioner on 28.08.2019 when he was with the victim. It is subsequent thereto that the victim is said to have given a statement that the petitioner committed forcible sexual acts on her promising to marry her. After taking the victim from her parents house on 21.08.2019, he had taken the victim to Hubballi where they stated for a few days, then went to Tirupati and thereafter to the house of the relatives of the petitioner in Hallur Village. It is in this location the petitioner was arrested. The victim had subsequently givan a statement that the petitioner had violently forced himself on her. However, the medical report does not indicate any injuries on the victim. The petitioner had approached the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal on 30.10.2019 seeking for enlargement on bail. The said application in Special S.C.(POCSO)49/2019 came to be rejected by way of an order dated 03.01.2020 on the ground that the victim was a minor and the offence being punishable with life imprisonment, the petitioner ought not be released on bail.

5. Sri Sanjay Katageri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner and the victim knowing each other, the victim had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner and there is no offence of kidnapping. They traveled to Hubballi and thereafter to Tirupati and they had agreed to get married subsequently. There is no forcible sexual act committed by the petitioner on the victim. The medical report indicates that there are no injuries. The victim is aged about 17 years, worldly wise and she is capable of making her decisions and the complaint has been filed only at the instigation of the parents of the victim. In the 164 statement recorded by the Addl. JMFC Court Kushtagi on 29.08.2019, when the Magistrate questioned the victim she has voluntarily stated that there was no force of duress applied by the petitioner on her. She had voluntarily gone with the petitioner she had consented to sex with the petitioner. Hence, on this ground the learned counsel would submit that the petitioner would be entitled for bail and the petitioner would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

6. Learned HCGP opposes for grant of bail that the victim being a minor cannot be consent by herself. The claim now made by the petitioner is unsustainable.

7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent and perused the papers.

8. The voluntary statemen