Karnataka High Court
T N Manjunatha vs State Of Karnataka on 6 February, 2025
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14240 OF 2024 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
T N MANJUNATHA
S/O LATE THIPPANNA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT BOYS GOVERNMENT
SCHOOL QUARTERS,
ATTIBELE TOWN, ANEKAL TALUK,
BENGALURU DISTRICT-562 107.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. C.H.HANUMANTHARAYA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ATTIBELE POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY
Digitally
signed by STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
LAKSHMI T HIGH COURT BUILDING,
Location:
High Court BANGALORE-560 001.
of Karnataka
2. SMT. UMA B
W/O VEERESH B,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT KABBERA, ONI KARATAGI,
KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 229.
PRESENTLY R/AT NISARGA PG,
CHANDRAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK,
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560 099.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL. SPP FOR R-1 AND R-2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CRIME NO.459/2024, REGISTERED WITH THE ATTIBELE
POLICE STATION ON 21.11.2024 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 352 OF BNS, 2023 AND
SECTION 8 AND 12 OF POCSO ACT, WHICH IS NOW PENDING
ON THE FILE OF LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, PRONOUNCED THE
FOLLOWING:
DATE OF RESERVED THE ORDER : 25.01.2025
DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE ORDER : 06.02.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CAV ORDER
Petitioner/sole accused in Crime No.459/2024 of
Attibele Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for offences
punishable under Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012
and Section 352 of BNS, 2023 has preferred this petition
under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge him on bail.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner,
learned Additional SPP for the State and perused the
material on record.
3. Brief facts of the case:- On 21.11.2024,
Smt.Shyamala, a resident of Attibele, contacted the child
helpline, and call was received by one Madan. During the
call, Smt.Shyamala reported that Manjunatha, the
petitioner, who was employed as a Government School
teacher in Attibele, had allegedly been engaging in
inappropriate conduct with her daughter. Acting on the
said information, Madan relayed the complainant to the
District Child Protection Officer (DCPO). Subsequently, the
defacto complainant, accompanied by several social
workers, proceeded to the school premises. Upon inquiry,
the victim, a 13 year old student in the VII Standard,
disclosed that on 15.11.2024, around 3.00 p.m., the
accused had called her to the vicinity of the bathroom
under the pretext of giving her a sweet (chikki) and
touched her inappropriately. Further, five other girls of VII
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
standard also reported similar incidents, wherein the
accused allegedly lured them with sweets and small
monetary incentives, such as Rs.5/- for snacks, and
subsequently engaged in inappropriate touching and also
watching them when they were going to toilet, abusing
them using foul language etc.
4. Based on a complaint lodged by the Legal
Probation Officer of DCPU, Anekal Taluk, aforementioned
crime was registered against the petitioner.
5. Petitioner came to be arrested on 21.11.2024
and he is in judicial custody. His bail petition has been
rejected by the learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge, FTSC-I, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, in
Crl.Misc No.2585/2024 dated 07.12.2024.
6. Firstly, it is contended by the learned counsel
for petitioner that the procedure contemplated under law
while arresting the petitioner was not followed. Petitioner
was arrested on 21.11.2024 at 8.30 p.m., and prior to his
arrest notice was issued to him without mentioning the
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
place and time to appear before the I.O. Further, within
two hours of service of notice, petitioner was arrested,
without assigning the grounds of arrest. Only on the next
day i.e., on 22.11.2024, petitioner was served with
grounds of arrest, which is against the mandate of
Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central
Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC
51 and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another
(2014) 8 SCC 273.
7. The learned counsel has also relied on other
judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court on the
above legal position and contended that non-compliance
with Section 41 of Cr.P.C., (Section 35 of BNSS, 2023)
shall inure to the benefit of the accused.
8. Secondly, the learned counsel has contended
that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely
implicated in the case, with an ulterior motive at the
behest of the persons who are on inimical terms with him.
The petitioner is having 20 years of experience as a
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
Government teacher and till this point there is no black
mark against him. He has won many awards including
State award. Vague allegations are made against him and
some of the alleged victims have denied the allegations.
In view of Registration of case, he has been suspended.
He has two daughters of young age; one among them is
suffering from complete disability and another pursuing
her graduation. If the petitioner is not enlarged on bail, his
entire family members will suffer. He is ready and willing
to abide by any conditions and will undertake to cooperate
with the investigation. Accordingly, he has sought to
release the petitioner on bail.
9. per contra, learned Additional SPP has filed
statement of objections and vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail. She contended that notice was issued to
the petitioner prior to arrest and later arrest memo was
also issued. Even otherwise, defective investigation if any
or due to such lapse, benefit should not be given to the
accused. The offence committed by the petitioner is
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
heinous in nature and non-bailable. The Hon'ble Apex
Court in Ganesan V. State (2020) 10 SCC 573 has
noted that the statement of prosecutrix if found worthy of
credence, then on her sole testimony, Court may convict
the accused. The victims have given their statements
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., (Section 183 of BNSS, 2023)
which reveals the alleged heinous act committed by the
petitioner. Hence, there is a prima facie case and if the
petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may threaten the
prosecution witnesses. Therefore, she has sought to
reject the petition.
10. Petitioner was arrested on 21.11.2024 at about
9.00 p.m., as per arrest memo dated 21.11.2024. Prior to
his arrest a notice was issued to him to appear before the
Investigation Officer on the same day. The Apex Court in
Arnesh Kumar (Supra) has made it clear while referring to
Section 41(1) of Cr.P.C., that a police officer is required to
issue notice directing the accused to appear before him at
a specified place and time. However, the police notice does
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
not indicate the same. Though the arrest was made on
21.11.2024, grounds of arrest are not mentioned. This
Court finds from the material on record that the grounds
of arrest were furnished on 22.11.2024, on which day,
petitioner was produced before the learned Magistrate and
remanded to judicial custody.
11. The punishment prescribed for the alleged
offences are below 7 years, maximum being imprisonment
for 5 years under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The
allegations are that the petitioner was misbehaving with
the minor girl students, abusing them etc. The statements
of five victims are recorded under 183 of BNSS, 2023.
Two of the alleged victims have denied the allegations.
12. Petitioner is in judicial custody from
22.11.2024. It is stated that he has been suspended from
service. Statements of the victims are already recorded.
Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances, petitioner
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
CRL.P No. 14240 of 2024
can be admitted to bail by imposing conditions.
Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is allowed.
(ii) Petitioner/sole accused in Crime No.459/2024
of Attibele Police Station, Bengaluru, shall be enlarged on
bail, subject to following conditions:
1. He shall execute a personal bond in a
sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh only) with two sureties for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
2. He shall furnish proof of his
residential address and shall inform
the Court, if there is change in the
address.
3. He shall not directly or indirectly
tamper with the prosecution
witnesses/victims.
4. He shall appear before the trial Court
regularly on all dates of hearing,
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5369
unless exempted from appearance
for genuine reasons.
Violation of any of the above condition shall result in
cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
HB
Ct:ar
