2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 56543
- 1 -
CRL.P No. 102410 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102410 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SHRI JAGTAR SINGH
S/O PREETHAM SINGH
AGE. 65 YEARS, OCCP. RETIRED ARMY,
R/O. MAHETA VILLAGE,
TQ. BABA BAKAL SAHIB,
DIST. AMRITSAR, PUNJAB STATE-143001
&PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOPPAL RURAL POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD 580001
2.
SRI GUMANRAM PATEL
S/O UMEDARAM PATEL
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. GINEGERI VILLAGE,
TQ. KOPPAL-583231
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT NO.1.
RESPONDENT NO.2 SERVED.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 ON
BAIL IN SPL.SC.(POCSO) NO.9/2020 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
- 2 -
CRL.P No. 102410 of 2022
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, AT
KOPPAL BEING TRIED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S
363, 376 OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF PROTECTION OF
CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2012 AND SECTION
9, 10, 11 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT,
REGISTERED WITH KOPPAL POLICE IN CRIME NO.08/2020.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
This petition is filed by accused No.5 under
Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(hereinafter referred to as the 8Cr.P.C.9, for brevity)
seeking bail in Crime No.8/2020 of Koppal Rural
Police Station registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 363 and 376 of The Indian Penal
Code (hereinafter referred to as the 8IPC9, for
brevity), Section 6 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to
as 8POCSO Act9, for brevity) and Sections 9, 10 and
11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.
The case of the prosecution is that, one
Sri.Gumanram Patel (respondent N0.2) has filed
- 3 -
complaint stating that his daughter, victim girl, aged
15 years, had slept in her bedroom on 14.01.2020 at
about 1:00 pm and on the next day, she was not
found in the bedroom. Accused No.1, who was
closely
moving
with
the
victim
girl,
was
also
missing. The said complaint came to be registered
in Crime No.8/2020 against accused No.1 for an
offence
under
Section
363
of
IPC.
After
investigation, charge sheet has been filed against
accused Nos.1 to 5. The accusation against accused
Nos.3 to 5 is, they helped accused Nos.1 and 2 for
swearing false affidavit to the effect that the victim
girl was aged 20 years. The petitioner/accused No.5
came to be arrested on 26.05.2022 and he is in
judicial custody. The petitioner filed bail application
in Spl.S.C. POCSO No.9/2020 and the same came to
be rejected by the learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Koppal, by order dated
27.06.2022. Therefore, the petitioner is before this
Court seeking bail.
- 4 -
3.
Heard
the
arguments
of
the
learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-
State.
Respondent No.2 in spite of service of notice,
has remained absent and unrepresented.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would
contend that, the main accusation is against accused
No.1, who is stated to have kidnapped the victim
girl, aged 16 years and marrying her in the Punjab
State with the help of accused Nos.2 to 5. It is his
further submission that the petitioner/accused No.5
is a retired military person and the only accusation
against him is that, he helped accused No.1 to swear
false affidavit of the victim stating that her age is 20
years and thereafter registered their marriage in the
Sub-Registrar9s Office. It is his further submission
that, the petitioner/accused No.5 is a retired military
person and he has been earlier granted anticipatory
- 5 -
bail with conditions and as he has not complied
those conditions, he came to be arrested and he is
in judicial custody. It is his further submission that
no
serious
overt
acts are
alleged against
the
petitioner. The petitioner is aged 65 years. As
charge-sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required
for custodial interrogation. With this, he prayed to
allow the petition.
5.
Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader would contend that the petitioner, who has
been granted anticipatory bail, has not complied the
conditions
and
has
not
appeared
before
the
investigating agency etc. It is his further submission
that, the petitioner is the resident of Punjab State
and if he is granted bail, it is difficult to secure his
presence for trial. Charge sheet material show prima
facie case against the petitioner for the offences
alleged against him. With this, he prayed to reject
the petition.
- 6 -
6.
Having regard to the submission made by
the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court
has gone through the charge sheet records and the
orders passed by the Special Court.
7.
The
accusation
against
this
petitioner/accused
No.5
is
that,
he
along
with
accused Nos.2 to 4 performed the marriage of
accused No.1 with the victim girl and helped the
victim girl to swear a false affidavit stating her age
as
20
years
and
thereafter,
registered
their
marriage. The serious act of kidnapping and f