SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SRI MANU H – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Heard Sri. Giri Kumar S.V., learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri. S.Vishwamurthy, learned HCGP for the

respondent-State and perused the records.

2.

Present petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

with the following prayer:

<Wherefore, the petitioner most humbly

prays that this Hon9ble Court may be pleased

to grant anticipatory bail and direct the

respondent No.1-police to enlarge him on bail,

in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.43/2021

registered by respondent No.1-police station

and registered as Spl. Case No.115/2021

against

the

Petitioner

for

the

offences

registered under Sections 366, 376(2)(n),

354(D), 363 read with Section 34 of IPC and

Sections 6 and 12 of POCSO Act and Section 9

of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, in the

interest of justice and equity=.

3

3.

The brief facts of the case are as under:

The complaint came to be filed by Smt. Lakhmi wife of

Venkateshachari contending that her daughter aged about 15

years 5 months has been eloped by the accused herein on

24.02.2021 and on 03.03.2021 at about 6.00 am, he married

her and had sexual intercourse with her. The victim girl has

been traced by the police and she was produced before the

Jurisdictional M

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top