IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15755 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /

482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SHIVASWAMY K V @ SHIVU S/O VEERABHADRAPPA K M AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 301.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.A. CHANDRASHEKARA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF NANJANAGUDU RURAL POLICE STATION, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571301 REPRESENTED BY SPP Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJAS HRI BENGALURU - 560001.

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 2. VICTIM REPRESENTED BY DIVYA KUMARI S FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS APTHA SAMALOCHAKARU MAKKALA SAHAYAVANI NO.1098/112, JILLA MAKKALA RAKSHANA GHATAKA MYSURU, MYSURU DISTRICT-571118.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP FOR R-1;

R2 - SERVED UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO PASS THE ORDER GRANT HIM ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.205/2025 OF NANJANAGUDU RURAL POLICE STATION, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 75 OF BNS AND SECTIONS 7 AND 8 OF POCSO ACT 2012.

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 sole accused under Section

482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.205/2025 of Nanjanagudu Rural Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Section 75 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 7 and 8 of Protection Of Children Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State.

3. In spite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the alleged incident is stated to have taken place on 05.09.2025, whereas the complaint came to be filed only on 12.09.2025, resulting in a delay of seven days in lodging the complaint. It is further contended that the parents of the victim girl have not filed the complaint, and that the complaint has been lodged by Aptha Samalochakaru, Makkala Sahayavaani. Now the investigation is over. Charge sheet has been filed, and therefore the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. The offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 8 is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to five years, and for the offence under Section 75 of BNS, the punishment provided is imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year. There are no criminal incidents of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State would contend that the victim is aged 9 years. On perusal of the charge sheet averments, the offence punishable under Section 8 is clearly attracted. The punishment provided for the said offence is imprisonment which may extend to five years. The delay in filing the complaint is not to be considered for the offence under the POCSO Act. Considering the said aspects, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

6. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.

7. As per the charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is that when the victim girl went to the petitioner’s xerox shop with the intention of obtaining a xerox copy of society card, the petitioner took her inside the shop, put his hand inside her dress, touched her chest and stomach, kissed her on the lips, and attempted to remove her tights. The alleged inci