Anticipatory bail granted as the victim, now the petitioner's wife, did not allege any wrongdoing, and the prosecution must prove her age for POCSO charges.

ORAL ORDER

Accused in Crime No.52/2023 registered by Channapatna Town Police Station, Ramanagara, for the offences punishable under Section 363 of IPC, Sections 4 , 5(L) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and Sections 9 & 10 of Child Marriage Restraint Act , is before this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in crime No.52/2024 was registered by Channapatna Town Police Station, Ramanagara, against the petitioner herein initially for the offences punishable under Sections 9 & 10 of Child Marriage Restraint Act , on the basis of the first information dated 06.06.2023 received from Siddalingaiah, who was working as a Child Development Project Officer, Channapatana Town, Ramanagara. Apprehending arrest in the said case, the petitioner had filed a Crl.Misc.No.368/2024 before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court which was rejected on

15.06.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim girl and her parents have not made any allegation against the petitioner. The victim is the wife of the petitioner and newly born child is the daughter of the petitioner. Petitioner’s marriage with the victim girl was solemnized after she attained age of majority and the prosecution has wrongly mentioned her age. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the police for the purpose of the investigation. Accordingly, prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the bail petition, submits that since the victim is a minor, alleged offences are get attracted against the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, who is the father of the victim girl, submits that the victim girl hails from poor background and there is nobody else to take care of the victim and her newly born child. The victim has filed an affidavit before this Court and prays that the petitioner may be granted relief as prayed in the petition.

6. The first information was submitted by the Child Development Project Officer, Channapatna, after he received information that the victim girl who had gone for her medical examination to the Government Hospital was found to be pregnant by five months. First informant on receipt of such information had made an inquiry with the victim girl and thereafter had approached the police. It is not in dispute that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the victim girl and from their wedlock they have a child, which is born subsequent to the registration of FIR in the present case. The victim girl has filed an affidavit before this Court stating that she was in love with the petitioner and she left her parents house and got married with the petitioner in a Darga and thereafter she is with him in his house. She has also stated that from their wedlock she has given birth to a child and there is nobody else to take care of her and her child. According to the petitioner, the victim girl was a major as on the date of his marriage. For the purpose of establishing the charges for the offences punishable under the provision of the POCSO Act, the prosecution is basically required to prove that the victim girl was minor as on the date of the alleged crime. For the said purpose prosecution is required to produce necessary documentary evidence to prove that the victim girl was a minor.

7. Undisputedly, the victim girl, her parents or her relatives have not made any allegations against the petitioner. Even in the statement made by the victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the Jurisdictional Magistrate, she has not made any allegation against the petitioner about he committing any sexual assault on her against her wishes.

8. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and he is required to take care of his wife and newly born child. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstance of the present case, I am of the view th