The court's decision hinged on the prima facie case against the petitioner in a matter involving allegations of sexual offences against a minor, leading to the denial of anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT

1. This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No. 120/2022 registered by Maddur Police Station, Mandya, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 506 and 420 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act' for short).

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

3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the complainant/victim has given the complaint before the police stating that when she was a minor in 2017, this petitioner came to her house and taking advantage of her mother and grandmother were not in the house, subjected her for sexual act and thereafter told that he would marry her and threatened not to disclose the same to anybody else. He had postponed the same saying that after attaining the age of 18 years, he would marry her and continuously subjected her for sexual act and ultimately marriage was engaged in the year 2020 and thereafter he has turned hostile saying that his mother is not interested in performing the marriage. A panchayat was also held in this regard and they left the house saying that they are going to perform the marriage with a bride, who is having Government job since the petitioner is also working in the Government department. Hence, lodged the complaint and based on the complaint, the police have registered the case invoking the offence punishable under Section 376, 506 and 420 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that when the complainant's family demanded 500 grams of gold for marriage, the marriage was not solemnized and apart from that, they have collected an amount of Rs. 3,25,000/- from the petitioner and the petitioner insisted to repay the amount and when he insisted to repay the amount, afterthought, the present complaint is filed. The learned counsel submits that legal notice was given on 17.05.2022, demanding to repay the amount and also to return the gold ornaments. The learned counsel produced the whatsapp chat before the Court and contends with regard to availing of money there are chats between the complainant and the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that when they made a false complaint, the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail invoking Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that this petitioner being an employee in Social Welfare Department, committed the sexual act against the victim/complainant when she was a minor in the year 2017, as a result, she became pregnant and the petitioner got aborted by taking her to Archana Hospital at Mandya, wherein he himself has declared as husband of the complainant while terminating the pregnancy and that was on 24.11.2020 and subsequently even corrected the copy of the complaint even though it is 11th it is manipulated as 18.05.2022 and the date of legal notice is dated 17.05.2022 and hence it is clear that the petitioner indulged in committing the sexual act when the victim/complainant was a minor, as a result she became pregnant and terminated the pregnancy. When such being the material on record, it is not a case for exercising the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The learned counsel submits that in 164 statement, the complainant has reiterated subjecting her for sexual act when she was a minor and in 164 statement she has stated with regard to medical termination of pregnancy by taking her to hospital and hence it is not a case for exercising the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

6. Having heard the respective learned counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, no doubt, the complaint is given in 2022, wherein specific allegations are made against the peti