Regular bail may be granted when primary witnesses (victim and complainant) turn hostile and fail to provide substantive evidence to support the prosecution's case, rendering continued judicial custody unwarranted.

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

1. Heard Sri Vijay Malali, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.N. Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1, and Sri Sadanand M.K., learned counsel for Respondent No.2.

2. Petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for shrot, ‘the BNSS’) with the following prayer:

“Wherefore for the reasons stated above it is hereby prayed before this Hon’ble Court that, be pleased to Grant regular bail in Spl Sc No.96/2025 (crime No.149/2025 in Byadagi P.S. ) pending on the file of Addl. Dist. and Session Judge FTSC-I Haveri for the offence p/u/sec. 65(1), 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f) of BNS 2023 and u/sec. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act of 2012 to accused in the ends of justice.”

3. The petitioner is the accused who has been convicted for the alleged offences under Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m) and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’) and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’).

4. The victim girl has been examined as PW-1 and the complainant has been examined as PW-2. Both of them have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned against the prosecution’s case. Detailed cross-examination conducted by the learned Public Prosecutor confronted the statement given by the victim girl under Section 181 of the BNSS (which corresponds to Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.) and the provisions relating to statements recorded under Section 181 of the BNSS and Section 183 of the BNSS.

5. During cross-examination, the victim did not adduce any positive answers that would advance the case of the prosecution to any extent. Further, the complainant was also cross-examined by the prosecution by confronting her with the statement recorded under Section 181 of the BNSS and the averments made in the complaint, but the same was denied by the complainant.

6. Under such circumstances, prima facie, there are no ingredients on record which would attract the offence under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act or the relevant offences under the BNSS.

7. The other material available on record is merely corroborative in nature, and in the absence of any substantive evidence in the form of reliable statements from the victim girl and the complainant, this Court is of the considered opinion that the continuation of the accused in judicial custody is no longer warranted. Other apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable and stringent conditions.

8. Accordingly, the following order is passed:

ORDER

i. The criminal petition is allowed.

ii. The Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees one lakhs only] with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge.

(1) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper the prosecution evidence or hamper the investigation process in any manner.

(2) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Haveri District without prior permission.

(3) Petitioner shall attend the court regularly.

(4) The petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences.

Violation of any of the above conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail.

Ordered accordingly.