SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Kar) 1202

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (DHARWAD BENCH)
Shivashankar Amarannavar, J.
Sunil Balu Balnaik @ Bhainaik - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Police Inspector Kakati Police Station - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 100920 of 2020
Decided On : 08-09-2020

Advocates Appeared:
S.M. Muchandi, Advocate, Seema Shiva Naik, Advocate

Prima facie evidence is crucial in determining the grant of bail in cases involving serious offences against minors.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Procedure - Offences under IPC and POCSO Act - Cr.P.C. - IPC - POCSO Act

Fact of the Case:

The accused sought bail in a case involving offences under IPC and POCSO Act for allegedly committing sexual assault on a minor victim. The delay in filing the complaint, medical evidence, eyewitness statements, and charge sheet materials were considered by the court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found a prima facie case against the accused and rejected the bail application.

Issues: Delay in filing the complaint, medical evidence, eyewitness statements, and prima facie case against the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the victim's statement, medical evidence, and eyewitness statements to establish a prima facie case against the accused.

Final Decision: The court rejected the bail application of the accused.

JUDGMENT

Shivashankar Amarannavar, J. - This petition is filed by the accused under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.235/2019 of Kakati Police Station (S.C. No.65/2020) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) and Sections 2, 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO Act', for brevity)

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Smt.Rajashree, w/o Sanju Desar, filed a written complaint alleging that she is residing in Kadoli village since last 10 years with her husband Sanju and they have two children i.e., the victim, aged 7 yeas and Yash, aged 4 years and her daughter-victim is studying in 1st standard in Marathi Primary school in the same village and her son Yash is studying in Anganawadi. Her husband is running a hair cut saloon and she goes for coolie work. They are residing in the house of one Vasant Sanadi on rental basis. Her husband is originally from Budihal village of Bailhongal taluk and she also knows the petitioner/accused-Sunil Balu Bhainaik, who is from the same area and he is the driver of the goods vehicle and he takes her both children for playing in the street. It is further alleged that on 11/12/2019 at about 7.00 am her husband had gone to his saloon and her daughter-victim, went to school at 10.00 clock. She completed her work and went for coolie work to the field of the petitioner. After completing the work she returned home at 6.30 pm and her husband and children were at home. Her daughter was crying holding her stomach and when enquired she told that at about 5.30 pm the petitioner had taken their children for playing and as they did not return for long time, he started searching and went to the cattle shed of the petitioner and his son was playing outside in a tempo and when he asked him about the victim, he pointed finger towards the cattle shed. He went to the cattle shed, saw the door was closed and called his daughter and found her crying in the cattle shed. Upon opening the door, he saw her pant was removed and Sunil was standing near the door. He brought both the children to the house. At that time it was about 6.00 pm. The complainant also enquired with the victim and brought her to Belagavi Civil Hospital for treatment. She filed a complaint stating that the petitioner committed sexual offence on her daughter-victim. The complaint came to be registered in Crime No.235/2019 of Kakati Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 2, 4, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act and the case is now pending in S.C. No.65/2020 before the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi. The petitioner filed bail application in Crl.Misc. No.41/2020 before the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi and the same came to be rejected on 29.06.2020. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail.

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

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the incident had taken place on 11.12.2019 and the complaint came to be filed on 12.12.2019 at 2.15 hours and there is a delay in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that the victim in her statement has stated that the petitioner removed her dress and laid on her. It is his further submission that under Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, the victim has stated not only the present incident but also with regard to the incident 4 days prior to the present incident. It is his further submission that in the opinion given by the Doctor, it is mentioned that there are no evidence and signs available of recent sexual assault other than the history. It is his further submission that the petitioner's mother is a Gram

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top