IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CRL.P.NO.100638/2020

BETWEEN

SHANKRAPPA S/O YANKAPPA KANNAPETE

AGED ABOUT: 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

R/O: GARJANAL, TQ: KUSHTAGI,

DIST: KOPPAL.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI.ANAND R.KOLLI, ADV.)

AND

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY:

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COUIRT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH-580011,

THROUGH TAVARAGERA POLICE STATION.

... RESPONDENT

(BY MISS.SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP.)

THIS PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO

ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF

ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO.0024/2020 REGISTERED

BY TAVAREGERA POLICE STATION, DISTRICT: KOPPAL FOR THE

ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC.8 & 12 PROTECTION OF

CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 AND SECTION 354(D)

& 448 OF IPC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT

MADE THE FOLLOWING:

2

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this criminal petition seeking

to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest

for the offences involving Sections 354(D) and 448 of IPC

and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, the complainant

namely, the father of the victim had gone to Sanganal

Durgammana Jatra along with another daughter and son,

the wife and victim were in the house. When they returned

at about 6.00 p.m., the wife and victim were weeping and

after enquiry, they narrated that when the wife gone to

nearby tank to wash the cloths and at that time, when the

victim was alone in the house at about 12.00 p.m. when

she was cleaning the plates and cooking utensils, the

petitioner was wandering 2-3 times in front of the house

and when the victim was found cleaning cooking utensils,

he entered into the house and hold her back and locked the

3

door and tried to commit the offence. At that time, the

victim cried for help and looking at her screaming, the

petitioner ran away from the spot. Thereafter, the victim

and her mother went to her sister house and narrated

incident, which lead to the filing of the complaint dated

19.02.2020.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that there is previous enmity between the families of both

the petitioner and the victim who were neighbours and

nothing has happened to invoke the POCSO Act in the case

on hand.

4.

On the other hand, Miss.Seema Shiva Naik

learned HCGP would vehemently contend that admitting

the petitioner to anticipatory bail would generate further

problem to the family as he would come in a position again

harass or do any overt act upon the victim.

4

5.

I have heard Sri.Anand R. Kolli, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Miss.Seema Shiva Naik, learned

HCGP for the State.

6.

A perusal of the complaint and FIR registered

against the petitioner would indicate that they are

registered invoking the offence under Sections 8 and 12 of

the POSCO Act and Sections 354(D) and 448 of IPC.

Sections 8 and 12 of the POSCO Act deals with the

punishment for sexual assault. The sexual assault is

defined under the POSCO Act means the same as it is in

Section 7. Section 7 of the POSCO Act defines sexual

assault and is extracted for the purpose of ready reference.

<Section 7. Sexual assault: Whoever, with

sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or

breast of the child or makes the child touch the

vagina, penis, anus or breast of such person or any

other person, or does any other act with sexual

intent which involves physical contact without

penetration is said to commit sexual assault.=

5

7.

The charge is also filed in the case on

18.08.2020 which also shows that there is no history of

sexual assault on physical examination of the victim. In

view of filing of charge sheet and the observations

here