Manjunath S/O Omanna Gunjagi vs State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 7612 Kant

                                                              -1-
                                                                    NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023
                                                                      CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023




                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                                         DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023

                                                           BEFORE

                                  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100462 OF 2023

                                 BETWEEN:

                                 MANJUNATH S/O OMANNA GUNJAGI,
                                 AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
                                 R/O. MUGADAKOPPA, TQ. HALIYAL,
                                 DIST. KARWAR-581329.
                                                                                   ... APPELLANT
                                 (BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)

                                 AND:

                                 1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
                                      (HALIYAL POLICE STATION),
                                      R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                                      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                      DHARWAD BENCH-580011.

                                 2.   SMT. RENUKA W/O PRAKASH KILIKATH,
                                      AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
                                      R/O. KALAGINAKOPPA, TQ. HALIYAL,
              Digitally signed
              by
              VIJAYALAKSHMI
VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI
                                      DIST. KARWAR-581329.
M KANKUPPI
              Date:
              2023.11.10
              11:47:56 +0530
                                      (MOTHER OF VICTIM)
                                                                                ... RESPONDENTS
                                 (BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R1;
                                  R2 APPEARED PHYSICALLY BEFORE THE COURT)

                                       THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.14A(2) OF CR.P.C.
                                 SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.08.2023,
                                 IN SPECIAL CASE NO.69/2023, BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
                                 SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, U.K. KARWAR (SPECIAL COURT FOR
                                 TRIAL OF CASES FILED UNDER POCSO ACT,) AND CONSEQUENTLY
                                 APPELLANT, WHO IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED IN SPECIAL CASE
                                 NO.69/2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
                                 SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, U.K. KARWAR (SPECIAL COURT FOR
                                 TRIAL OF CASES FILED UNDER POCSO ACT), IN CONNECTION WITH
                                 HALIYAL P.S. CRIME NO.63/2023, DATED 22.04.2023, FOR THE
                                -2-
                                     NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023
                                      CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023




OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 363, 342, 376(N) OF IPC, U/SEC. 4 AND 6 OF
POCSO ACT AND U/SEC. 3(1)(w-1), 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST ACT, BE
ENLARGED ON BAIL.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                          JUDGMENT

The sole accused has filed this appeal praying to set

aside the order dated 14.08.2023 passed in Spl.Case

No.69/2023 by the learned Additional District and Sessions

Judge, FTSC-1, U.K,. Karwar, whereunder the bail application

of the appellant/accused sought in respect of Crime

No.63/2023 of Haliyal Police Station registered for offences

punishable under Sections 363, 342, 376(2)(n) of the Indian

Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC', for short),

Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO

Act', for short) and Section 3(1)(w-1) and 3(2)(va) of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SC & ST

Act', for short), came to be rejected.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023 CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023

appearing for respondent No.1-State. Respondent No.2 is

physically present before the Court and she submits no

objection for grant of bail to the appellant/accused.

3. The case of the prosecution is that, the victim girl

is aged 17 years and she belongs to scheduled caste and

the appellant/accused used to go for work in the agricultural

land situated by the side of the land of the victim girl and

the appellant/accused forced the victim girl to love him and

both were loving each other since two years. The

appellant/accused on 03.01.2022 at about 2:00 pm had

forcible sexual intercourse with the victim girl promising her

to marry and thereafter had sexual intercourse with the

victim many times and he had last sexual intercourse on

20.11.2022. The appellant accused came to now that the

victim girl became pregnant and on 03.03.2023, he took the

victim girl to Haliyal and admitted her to Sanjeevini

Ayurveda Medical College and Hospital and she gave birth to

a female child on 22.04.2023. Charge sheet came to be

filed against the appellant/accused for the aforesaid

offences. The appellant/accused came to be arrested on

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023 CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023

11.06.2023 and he is in judicial custody. The

appellant/accused filed bail application and the same came

to be rejected by the impugned order which is challenged in

this appeal.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant

would contend that, on perusal of the statement of the

victim girl recorded by the police would reveal that the

victim girl is aged more than 17 years and she had love

affair with the appellant/accused. The victim girl is of the

age of understanding the consequences of her acts. The

appellant/accused has now married the victim girl. The

victim girl has now given birth to a female child and the

presence of the appellant/accused is required for taking care

of his wife and the new born baby. As charge sheet is filed,

the appellant/accused is not required for custodial

interrogation. Without considering all these aspects, the

learned Spl. Judge has passed the impugned order which

requires interference by this Court. With this he prayed to

allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellant/accused.

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023 CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government

Pleader would contend that the victim girl belongs to

scheduled caste and she is aged below 18 years. This

appellant/accused, under the promise of marrying her, had

forcible sexual intercourse with her for number of times. As

a result, the victim girl became pregnant and gave birth to a

female baby. The charge sheet material show prima facie

case against this appellant/accused for the offences alleged

against him. Considering the said aspects, the learned

Special Judge has rightly rejected the bail application of the

appellant/accused. With this, he prayed to dismiss the

appeal.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader,

this Court has gone through the charge sheet material and

the impugned order.

7. The date of birth of the victim girl is 30.05.2005

and she is aged about 17 years 7 months as on the date of

the alleged offence. The statement of the victim girl

recorded by the police reveal that she had love affair with

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023 CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023

the appellant/accused. The victim girl is of the age of

understanding the consequences of her acts. As charge

sheet is filed, the appellant/accused is not required for

custodial interrogation. Without considering all these

aspects, the learned Special Judge has passed the impugned

order which requires interference by this Court. The

appellant/accused has made out grounds for setting aside

the impugned order and grant bail with conditions.

8. In the result, the following:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed.

The impugned order dated 14.08.2023 passed by the

learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1,

Belagavi, is set aside. The appellant/accused is granted bail

in Crime No.63/2023 of Haliyal Police Station pending in

Spl.Case No.69/2023 subject to following conditions:

i. The appellant/accused shall execute a personal

bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13023 CRL.A No. 100462 of 2023

the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional

Court.

ii. The appellant/accused shall not tamper the

prosecution witnesses.

iii. The appellant/accused shall appear before the trial

Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted

and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

kmv ct:bck