IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16215 OF 2025

[(438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)]

BETWEEN:

DR. PRATHIMA P.

D/O PUTTAPPA,

W/O ROBIN,

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

R/O KOUSTHUBHA NILAYA, 1^ST MAIN,

RADHAMANI LAYOUT, ANALEKOPPA, SAGAR,

SHIVAMOGGA - 577 401.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. DIWAKARA, SENIOR ADVOCATE ALONG WITH

SRI. ADITYA D. ADVCOATE FOR PETITIONER)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH

INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

SAGAR TOWN POLICE STATION,

Digitally signed by

LAKSHMINARA YANA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

MURTHY RAJASHRI

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

Location: HIGH

COURT OF BENGALURU - 560 001.

KARNATAKA

2. SMT. GEETHA,

W/O SANTHOSH,

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

NEAR TAX OFFICE, 2^ND CROSS,

ANALEKOPPA, SAGARA,

SHIVAMOGGA - 577 401.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ABHIJEET S. K. RAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.248/2025 OF THE RESPONDENT SAGAR TOWN POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 64(2)(m), 89 AND 3(5) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA (BNS), 2023 AND SECTION 6 OF PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I, SHIVAMOGGA.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.4 under Section

482 of Bharatiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.248/2025 of Sagar Town Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 89 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner would contend that, the averments of the complaint indicate that, the parents have taken the victim girl to the hospital for termination of pregnancy. The provisions of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 provides for termination of pregnancy of a girl aged below eighteen (18) years with the consent of the guardian. The averments of the complaint itself indicate that, the mother has given consent for termination of pregnancy. The doctor who has conducted the scanning i.e., accused No.6 has been granted bail. Even the mother of the victim girl who subsequently arrayed as accused No.8 has been granted bail. The Government Doctor has right to have private practice. The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation, if any. The petitioner is a Government Doctor and her services are essential in the hospital. With these, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 would contend that, this petitioner being a Government Doctor had done medical termination of pregnancy of a minor girl for gratification of Rs.50,000/- even in spite of knowing that the victim girl is a minor. The petitioner had a duty under Section 19 of POCSO Act to intimate the offence to the concerned officers. There is no record in the hospital regarding termination of pregnancy. Even the fetus has been cremated and there is no report in that regard. For contravention of Section 19, offence is Section 21 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The punishment provided for offence under Section 21 of the POCSO Act is imprisonment which may extend to six (6) months. With these, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that, in order to save the life of the victim girl, she has taken the victim girl to the hospital. Now, respondent No.2 has also been arrayed as accused. He fu