Prima facie evidence of sexual assault and threat to victim's family outweighed inconsistencies in victim's statements at the bail stage.

JUDGMENT

K. Natarajan, J. - This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No. 55/2022 registered by Tumkuru Women Police Station, Tumkuru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012('POCSO Act' for short).

2. Heard the arguments of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. The respondent No. 2 is also represented by the learned High Court Government Pleader.

3. The case of the prosecution is that respondent No. 2 Hanumantharayappa, filed a complaint with the police on 05.05.2022, alleging that his niece victim girl aged about 15 years is residing with him in his house where his father is also residing. The parents of the victim girl died about eight years back and she is studying in IX standard. About 15 days prior to the filing of the complaint, he had been to his wife's native place and when he came back, the victim was not found in the house. On enquiry, he came to know that she was in the grandmother's house. Thereafter, he went there and questioned and at that time, she revealed that about 15 days back, the accused came inside the house when it was raining and he closed her mouth and committed rape on her when she was alone in the house. Thereafter, after one week, again he came to the house at 10.00 a.m. and gave keypad Carbon mobile phone and he stated he will come back with SIM card. Thereafter, once again he came on 02.05.2022, and took her to Kyatasandra. Thereafter, he is said to have committed sexual assault on her once again and therefore she left the village and went to grandmother's house. After coming to know about the incident through the victim girl, the complainant filed the complaint with the police. During the investigation, the police arrested the petitioner and he was remanded to judicial custody. His bail petition came to be rejected and hence he is before this Court.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated. He is a RTI activist and staying opposite to the house of the complainant and there was a serious allegation against him that he was a RTI activist against land grabbers. A civil dispute between one Girish and the complainant is pending before the Civil Court and therefore in order to overcome the civil case, a false case has been foisted against him. There are inconsistencies and contradictions in the statement of the victim made before the police as well as the Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. where she has not stated anything about the threat made by the petitioner and his family, whereas she has stated before the Magistrate that there was a threat made by the accused. The victim was a minor girl and tutored. In order to prevent the voice against the land grabbers, a false case has been foisted. The medical evidence is also not against the petitioner. There were different versions which reveals a false case was made against the petitioner to implicate him. The investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and he is ready to abide by the conditions and hence he may be granted bail.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader seriously objected the bail petition and contends that the age of the victim is 14 years 7 months and her date of birth is 22.12.2007. The medical examination report clearly reveals that there was sexual assault on the victim. The opinion is also given by the doctor about the sexual assault. There is no inconsistency in the statement of the victim made before the Magistrate and the police in respect of the sexual assault. There was a serious threat on the victim and her family. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted bail, there is every possibility of tampering the witnesses. He also