IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.G. Uma, J.
Parashurama Gowdar – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 1541 of 2023
Decided On : 16-05-2023
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the petitioner-accused, who was charged with offences under the Child Marriage Restraint Act, POCSO Act, and Indian Penal Code, considering the serious nature of the allegations, the age of the victim, and the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-accused sought bail in a case involving offences under the Child Marriage Restraint Act, POCSO Act, and Indian Penal Code. The victim, a minor girl, alleged that she had married the petitioner and had a physical relationship with him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the serious nature of the allegations, the victim's age, and the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents warranted granting bail. The court imposed conditions to address the apprehension of the prosecution witnesses being threatened or tampered with.
Issues: The issue before the court was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the serious nature of the allegations, the victim's age, and the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents in granting bail.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on bail, subject to specific conditions to prevent similar offences, threats to witnesses, and ensure appearance before the court.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
M. G. UMA, J. - The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.64/2022 of Gowribidanur Town Police Station, pending in Spl.C.No.140/2022 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I Court, Chikkaballapur, registered for the offences punishable under Sec. 9 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act, Sec. 6 of POCSO Act and Ss. 366, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Mr.Srishyla.
2. Heard Sri.Raghavendra.P.H, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Krishna Kumar K.K, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused. He is aged about 24 years. He is innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 2/9/2022 and since then he is in judicial custody. The investigation has been completed and the charge sheet is also filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the victim is already a major, aged more than 18 years. She has not undergone medical examination. Even her statement was recorded under Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C. In view of the same, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment. He is not having any criminal antecedents. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offences. The victim was aged about 16 years and 7 months at the time of the incident. The petitioner knowing fully well that the victim is a minor has committed sexual assault by kidnapping her. Looking to the nature and seriousness of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C.?" My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following: R E A S O N S
6. The allegations made against the petitioner is of serious nature. The victim is said to be a minor girl aged about 17 years. Her statement under Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C was recorded by the learned Magistrate, wherein, the victim has given reasons for accompanying the petitioner. She has also stated that she has married the petitioner and had physical relationship. Admittedly, the victim has refused to undergo medical examination. It is stated that the victim is residing with her parents. The petitioner is aged about 24 years and is not having any criminal antecedents. Therefore, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to infringement to his right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.64/2022 of Gowribidanur Town Police Station, on obtaining a bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
The seriousness of the allegations, the age of the victim, and the petitioner's criminal antecedents are crucial factors in determining bail eligibility.
Bail is a rule and rejection is an exception. The court must consider various factors, including the nature and seriousness of the offence, when deciding on bail in a non-bailable offence.
The willingness of the victim in the marriage and the impact of the petitioner's custody on the victim and their children were crucial in the court's decision to grant bail.
The court considered the victim's conflicting statements, her age, and the circumstances of her marriage in granting bail to the accused, highlighting the importance of evaluating the totality of cir....
The willingness of families to perform marriage and precedent of a similar case influenced the court's decision to grant bail.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of evidence from the victim girl to support the charges influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the accused.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of considering the specific circumstances of the case, including the accused's cooperation with the investigation and the absence of criminal antecedent....
The gravity of the offense, evidence of forcible sexual acts, and the victim's age are crucial factors in determining bail applications in cases involving minors and sexual offenses.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.