IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4173/2020

BETWEEN:
Narayanappa
S/o late Venkatahanumaiah
Aged about 67 years
R/at Kadabagere Colony
Dasanapura Hobli
Bengaluru North Taluk
Bengaluru District-562 123.
...Petitioner
(By Sri. Ajay Kumar, Advocate)

AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
by Madanayakanahally Police Station
Rep. By SPP,
High Court of Karnataka
Pin no – 560001.
2. Alamelamma
W/o Kuppaswamy
Aged about 32 years
R/at in front of Huliyuramma
Temple, Sigehalli gate
Magadi Main Road
Dasanpura north Taluk
Bengaluru District
Karnataka - 560091.
 -2-

...Respondents
By Sri. M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP for R1
Sri. B. Ravindra Adv, for R2.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. praying to release the petitioner on bail, in Crime
No.525/2019 (SPL.C.No2/2020), Madanayakanahally for
the alleged offences punishable under section 366(A),
376 (3), 506 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 4,6
of POSCO Act.

This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders

‘through Video Conference’, this day, the Court made
the following:

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by petitioner-

accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying this Court

to release him on bail in Crime No. 525/2019 (Spl.C. No.

2/2020 pending on the file of II Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru) of

Madanayakanahalli police station for the offence

punishable under Sections 366A, 376 (3), 506 of IPC

and also under Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

 -3-

2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri Ajay

Kumar for the petitioner-accused virtually and learned

High Court Government Pleader Sri M. Divakar Maddur

for the respondent No. 1 –State and learned counsel Sri

B. Ravindra for the complainant.

3. The gist of the complaint is that the mother

of the victim filed the complaint alleging that since eight

years they were residing by doing coolie work. About

five months back all of a sudden, his daughter-victim

missed from the house. They made a search for the

victim but they did not get any clue. Thereafter they

vacated the house and they came back to Kilari village

in Mandya District. On 20.10.2019 the petitioner-

accused Narayanappa who is living like a husband with

his mother brought the victim and they went to the said

place and questioned the victim. The victim told that

she has been taken to a house to work in one house and

as the owner had been to Deepavali festival, she has

 -4-

been given vacation and hence she has been brought.

They suspected and that they made a detailed enquiry

with the victim and thereafter she informed that the

petitioner-accused took her and she has been sexually

assaulted being the grandfather of the victim. On the

basis of the complaint, the case has been registered.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner-

accused submitted that no missing complaint has been

registered though the daughter of the complainant had

been missed from the house. After a long gap, the

complaint has been registered by implicating the

petitioner-accused. It is his submission that already the

charge sheet has been filed and the medical reports

produced clearly goes to show that the victim is not

used to any act like that of sexual intercourse and even

the hymen could not be assessed and then under such

circumstances the contention of the prosecution that the

petitioner-accused took the minor victim and had

sexually assaulted cannot be acceptable. It is his

 -5-

further submission that if at all the case of the

prosecution, if it is accepted, it may amount nothing but

only outraging modesty of a woman. It is further

submission that the complainant has falsely implicated

the petitioner in the alleged crime only with an intention

to take revenge on the petitioner-accused. He is ready

to abide by any of the conditions that may be imposed

by this Court and he is ready to offer sureties. On these

grounds, he prays to allow the petition and to release

the petitioner-accused on bail.

5. Per contra the learned High Court

Government Pleader for respondent-State vehemently

argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused has

eloped the minor girl and subsequently she has been

subjected to sexual assault. It is his submission that the

charge sheet has already been filed and statement of

the victim has also been recorded under Section 164 of

Cr.P.C., wherein she has fully supported the case of the

 -6-

prosecution. It is his further submission that if at this

juncture, if the petitioner-accused is released on bail, he

may abscond and he may not be available for trial. On

these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. I have carefully gone through the

submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the

parties and perused the records and the charge sheet

material.

7. On perusal of the medical report of the

victim, it is clearly stated that the individual is not used

to any act like that of sexual intercourse and that the

hymen could not be assessed and that being in the

medical report, the statement under Section 164 of

Cr.P.C. is recorded by the Magistrate will not come in aid

to the case of prosecution to hold that the petitioner has

sexually assaulted the minor victim girl. The other

aspects which are urged by learned counsel for the

 -7-

parties are to be considered and appreciated only during

the course of trial.

8. Taking into consideration the above said

factual matrix on hand, I am of the considered opinion

that the petitioner has made out a case so as to release

him on bail

9. In that light, the petition is allowed.

Petitioner-accused is ordered to be released on bail in in

Crime No. 525/2019 (Spl.C. No. 2/2020 pending on the

file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru) of

Madanayakanahalli police station for the offence

punishable under Sections 366A, 376 (3), 506 of IPC

and also under Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 with following

conditions:-

i) Petitioner-accused shall execute a

personal bond for a sum of Rs.
2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) with
 -8-

two sureties for the likesum to the

satisfaction of the trial Court.

ii) He shall not threaten or tamper with the

prosecution evidence directly or
indirectly.

iii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the

Court without prior permission.

iv) He shall mark his attendance once in a

month on every first between 10.00 a.m.
to 05.00 p.m. till the trial is concluded

v) He shall be regular in attending the trial

Court proceedings, unless he is exempted
for any good reasons.

vi) He shall not indulge in similar type of

criminal activities.

vii) If any of the conditions are violated, the

bail is liable to be cancelled.

Sd/-
JUDGE

mbb