1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6335/2021

BETWEEN:

NIKHIL.D.L.

S/O LAKKE GOWDA

AGED 21 YEARS

R/O DODDABEMMATHI VILLAGE

MALLIPATNA HOBLI

ARAKALAGUDU TALUK

HASSAN DISTRICT 3 573 130.

& PETITIONER

(BY SRI:MANJUNATH.B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

KONANUR POLICE

REPRESENTED BY

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BANGALORE 3 560 001.

& RESPONDENT

(BY SRI:VINAYAKA.V.S., HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439

OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN

SPL.C.NO.312/2021 OF CR.NO.65/2021 OF KONANUR POLICE

STATION, HASSSAN FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER

2

SECTIONS 363, 376 OF IPC SEC.6 OF POCSO ACT AND SEC.9

OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of

bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Spl.C.No.312/2021 of

Crime No.65/2021 of Konanur Police Station, Hassan,

pending on the file of Addl. District and Sessions Judge,

FTSC-1, Hassan, registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 363, 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for

short 'IPC'), and under Section 6 of Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 8POCSO Act9)

and under Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act,

2006, (for short 8PCM Act9) on the basis of the first

information lodged by the informant-Rajappa.

2.

Heard Sri.Manjunath.B.R., learned Counsel for

the petitioner and Sri.Vinayaka.V.S. learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused

the materials on record.

3

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted

that petitioner is the sole accused. 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 16.06.2021 and since then he is in judicial

custody. It is stated that the victim girl is aged 17 years.

Missing complaint was registered by the father of the

victim girl and after her returning to the house, FIR was

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363,

376 of POCSO Act. Statement of the victim under Section

164 of Cr.P.C. is recorded by the learned Magistrate.

Victim has not supported the case of prosecution. Since

the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed,

the petitioner is not required for further investigation. The

victim herself has stated that she was in love affair with

the petitioner. Under such circumstances no offence could

be alleged against the petitioner. His detention in custody

would amount to pre-trial punishment. He is not having

any criminal antecedents. He is the permanent resident of

4

the address mentioned in the cause tile to the petition and

is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that

would be imposed by this Court. Hence he prays to allow

the petition.

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. Statement of the victim under

Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is recorded, wherein, she has fully

supported the case of prosecution. The charge sheet is

already filed, which makes out a strong prima-facie

evidence against the petitioner. Under such circumstances,

the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on 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:

5

<Whether

the

petitioner

is

entitled for grant of bail under Section

439 of Cr.P.C.?=

My answer to the above point is in 8Affirmative9 for

the following:

R E A S O N S

6.

The materials on record disclose that serious

al