Back
2020 Supreme(Kar) 958
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (KALABURAGI BENCH)
P.N. Desai, J.
Bhimesha - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 200379 of 2020
Decided On : 23-07-2020
Arunkumar Amargundappa, Advocate, Mallikarjun Sahukar, Advocate
The severity of the offences, impact on society, and prima facie material against the accused are crucial factors in determining bail eligibility.
Headnote:
Bail - Offences under IPC, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Act - Sections 376, 506, 4, 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(1)(i), 3(2)(v) - The court dismissed the bail petition considering the gravity of the offences, impact on society, and prima facie material against the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail for offences under IPC, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Act, involving the sexual assault and rape of a minor girl belonging to a Scheduled Caste.
Finding of the Court:
The court found prima facie material against the accused, considering the victim's statement, medical evidence, and eyewitness account. It also emphasized the severity of the offences and the impact on society.
Issues: The issues revolved around the delay in lodging the complaint, lack of bodily injury, and the petitioner's eligibility for bail based on the nature and seriousness of the offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the gravity of the offences, impact on society, and prima facie material against the accused in denying the bail petition.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail petition, emphasizing the severity of the offences and the lack of grounds for bail.
JUDGMENT
P.N.Desai, J. - The petitioner has filed this petition under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of bail in respect of Spl (P) Case No.310/2020 pending on the file of I Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur for the offences punishable under Sections 376 & 506 of Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offices Act, & Secs. 3(1) (r) (s) (w), (i) 3 (2) (v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity's) Act.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 17-04-2020 at about 10.00 a.m., near the house of the accused at Kallur village, the complainant-prosecutrix i.e., victim girl aged about 15 years and her sister Monika who is aged about seven years went near the house of accused to bring cow-dung, when they were fetching the cow-dung, at that time, accused came there and he gagged the mouth of the victim girl with the towel which was on her chest. It was about 10.30 a.m., he took the victim to adjacent haystack and made her to fall on the surface and pulled her lunga towards upper side and forcibly committed sexual assault and rape on the victim girl without her consent and wish, though she tried to escape, the accused did not leave her. The younger sister of the victim girl ran away after seeing this to call her family members. Thereafter words the accused threatened the victim girl stating that, he will not leave her if she informed about this to anybody. Then the said girl Monica brought her family members, victim girl informed them about the incident. In this regard after discussion in the family, they lodged complaint before the police on 19-04-2020 at about 8.30 p.m.
It is further contended that, the said victim girl was a minor and also belongs to Scheduled caste i.e., bhovi waddar. Knowing well that she is a minor and belongs to scheduled caste, sexual assault and rape was committed by the accused. On the basis of the statement of the victim girl, Sirwar police have registered a case in crime No.51/2020 for the offences punishable under sections 376 & 506 of Indian Penal Code, sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences and under section 3(1) (r ) (s), 3(1) (w), 3(2) (v) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity's) Act.
3. The petitioner/accused was arrested on 20- 04-2020, since then he is in judicial custody. His bail application came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Raichur in Cril. Misc. No.38/2020 on 06-06- 2020. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/accused has filed this petition on the following grounds:
That, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that, the petitioner has committed any offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There are no eyewitnesses or circumstantial evidence to connect the petitioner/accused with the guilt. The petitioner is innocent. The statements before the police and before the Magistrate are contradictory and inconsistent with each other. If at all accused has committed any forcible sexual assault or rape, then the victim-girl should have necessarily sustained bodily injury. But the perusal of the charge sheet papers, it reveals that, she had not at all sustained any bodily injury. The alleged rape has taken place on 17-04- 2020. However the FIR came to be registered on 19-04- 2020 after lapse of two days. There is no proper explanation in this regard. There are no external injuries. The petitioner is young and 23 years old. It is the allegation that, the said rape has taken place in the heart of the village and public moves in the day time, so that itself creates doubt about the occurrence of the incident. The witnesses are interested. The petitioner/accused committed rape or not is to be considered at the time of trial. The offences alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Considering the petitioner /accused is kept in judicial custody since more than six months, he be released on bail. The petitioner is having movable and immov
