SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 26146

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.G.S. KAMAL
DR. HARSHIT. Y. R. – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY KARNATAKA BY – Respondent
CRL.P 7146/2026



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:24766

CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7146 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

1. DR. HARSHIT. Y. R.

S/O RAMU Y.V.,

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

WORKING AS RADIOLOGIST,

NAVI DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,

K.R. PETE TOWN,

MANDYA DISTRICT-571426

RESIDING AT NO. 561,

CBI COLONY, INKAL,

MYSURU - 570008

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR

SRI. KUMARA K G., ADVOCATE)

Digitally

signed by

SUMA B N

AND:

Location:

HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

1. STATE BY KARNATAKA BY

K.R. PET RURAL POLICE STATION,

MANDYA-571401

REPRESENTED BY

HIGH COURT BUILDING

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

BANGALORE-560001

2. SMT.PADMAMMA

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:24766

CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026

HC-KAR

GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL

NON-GAZETTED,

CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

KR PETE, MANDYA DISTRICT-571426

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.THEJESH.P., HCGP FOR R1)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483

BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE ON BAIL IN CR.NO.123/2026

REGISTERED BY K.R PET TOWN POLICE STATION, MANDYA,

FOR OFFENCES U/S 376(2)(n) R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND SEC.6

AND 21 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 PENDING BEFORE THE C/C

FTSC-II AT MANDYA.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner, who is accused No.3 in Crime No.123/2026

registered by K.R. Pet Rural Police Station for the offences

punishable under Sections 376(2) (n) r/w Section 34 of IPC and

Sections 6 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) is before this Court seeking

grant of regular bail.

2. A complaint came to be filed by respondent No.2 -

de facto complainant alleging that on an inspection conducted

by Lokayuktha on 17.04.2026, at the Private Scanning Centers

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:24766

CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026

HC-KAR

including the one belonging to petitioner, the scanning report

disclosed the LMP date as 25.11.2023 and the date of birth of

the girl mentioned in the card as 13.12.2005, thus indicating

the age of the victim girl being below 18 years. Taking note of

this aspect of the matter, it is further alleged that the petitioner

herein had failed to discharge the mandatory duty as

contemplated under Section 19 of the POCSO Act and not

taking necessary steps for protection of the victim girl by

reporting the same to the concerned, has resulted in

registration of Crime No.123/2026 for the offences noted as

above.

3. The petitioner was arrested. His application seeking

bail filed before the Fast Track Special Court-II at Mandya

under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 came to be rejected vide

order dated 08.05.2026. Consequently, the present petition is

filed by the petitioner seeking grant of bail.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner

taking this Court through the records submits that even if the

allegations in the complaint are taken on face value, there is no

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:24766

CRL.P No. 7146 of 2026

HC-KAR

justification of any nature whatsoever to keep him under

confinement, as the alleged offence is bailable.

5. Learned Senior counsel further points out there is

no prohibition under the Act for granting of bail as the nature of

the allegation against the petitioner is only of him not informing

the concerned as contemplated under Section 19 of the POCSO

Act, the same cannot be equated to the offence otherwise

contemplated under POCSO Act. Hence, seeks for allowing the

petition.

6. Learned HCGP on the other hand submits that there

is dereliction of duty on the part of the petitioner which has

resulted in filing of the complaint and consequent arrest.

Hence, opposes the bail petition.

7. Heard. Perused the records.

8. The complaint indicates that an inspection was

conducted by the Lokayuktha in the Scanning Center of the

petitioner, wherein, scanning report disclosed LMP date of the

victim girl as 25.11.2023 whose date of birth was mentioned as

13.12.2005 in the records. It is this fact which has triggered

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top