[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Mahadevan @ Deepu vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
CRL.P No. 2962 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2962 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI MAHADEVAN @ DEEPU
S/O RAJ
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
R/AT NO.402, BALAJI HOUSE,
10TH 'A' MAIN, PRAGATHI LAYOUT,
HONGASANDRA
BANGALORE CITY - 560 068
Digitally ...PETITIONER
signed by (BY SRI. RAMESH H.N., ADVOCATE FOR
PAVITHRA
N SRI. NARAYANASWAMY K N., ADVOCATE)
Location:
High Court AND:
of
Karnataka 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION,
R/BY. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
CRL.P No. 2962 of 2026
HC-KAR
2. SRI. RAMAKRISHNA,
S/O R.RANGASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT. KRISHNAPPA LAYOUT,
PILLAGNAHALLI, B.G.ROAD,
BENGALURU CITY - 560 083.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY Ms. ASMA KOUSER., ADDL. SPP FOR R1
BY SRI. SRINATH B V., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
----
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS)
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL UNDER SECTION
483 OF THE BNSS 2023 IN (CRIME NO.265/2024)
SPL.CC.NO.2377/2025 IN KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 336(3),
137(2), 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 65(1) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA
SANHITA, 2023 AND UNDER SECTIONS 17, 4(2), 5(l), 5(j), 6
OF POCSO ACT-2012 AND UNDER SECTION 9 OF PROHIBITION
OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT AND UNDER SECTION 27(b) OF
NDPS ACT-1985 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, F.T.S.C-III, AT
BENGALURU CITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
CRL.P No. 2962 of 2026
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner / accused No.1, is before this Court
seeking regular bail in Spl.C.C. No.2377/2025 pending on
the file of learned Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge, FTSC-III, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime
No.265/2024 registered by the respondent-police for the
offences punishable under Sections 336(3), 137(2),
64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 17, 4(2), 5(l), 5(j), 6
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child
Marriage Act and under Section 27(b) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Brief facts of the case:
2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint came to
be registered by the father of the victim, stating that on
13.07.2024, the victim girl has been abducted from the
lawful custody of her parents and she had been kept in a
dilapidated house at Koteuru, Krishnagiri District, Tamil
Nadu State and it is alleged that the petitioner had
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
HC-KAR
committed sexual assault on the victim girl on many
occasions. Again, the petitioner returned to Bengaluru
along with the victim and made her to stay in a house at
Praghathi Layout, Hongasandra.
3. It is further stated that the petitioner married the victim
in the month of January 2025 and both were staying in
Hongasandra. The victim became pregnant. Thereafter,
she gave birth to a child. Based on the said complaint,
the respondent - Police have registered a case, conducted
investigation and submitted the charge sheet.
4. Heard Sri Ramesha H.N., learned counsel appearing for
Sri Narayanaswamy K.N., learned counsel for the
petitioner, Ms. Asma Kouser, learned Addl. SPP for the
respondent No.1 and Sri Srinath B.V., learned counsel for
the respondent No.2.
5. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is
that the petitioner is aged about 19 years. He has been
falsely implicated in this case. He is innocent of the
alleged offences. In fact, the petitioner was unaware of
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
HC-KAR
the victim's actual age. The petitioner is the earning
member of the family and he is the permanent resident of
Hongasandra, Bengaluru. He will abide by the conditions
imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail.
Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the
petitioner prays to allow the petition.
6. Per contra, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1 -
State vehemently submitted that the age of the victim is
15 years 3 months. She was kidnapped by the petitioner
and taken to Tamil Nadu, where they stayed for three to
four days. Thereafter, they returned to Bengaluru and
stayed in Hongasandra. Though it is alleged that the
petitioner married the victim and that they were living
together and she has now given birth to a child, the fact
remains that the victim is a minor and the petitioner has
committed a heinous offence against the minor, which is
an unpardonable act committed by the petitioner against
a minor girl. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant him
bail. Making such submissions, the learned Additional
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
HC-KAR
SPP for respondent No.1 - State prays to reject the
petition.
7. Similarly, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has
submitted that the victim has given birth to a child. The
victim is before this Court and she states that she is
willing to stay along with the petitioner. The petitioner is
the earning member of the family. If he is released on
bail, he will take care of the victim and the child. Hence,
the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Making such
submissions, learned counsel for the respondent No.2
supported the submissions made by learned counsel for
the petitioner and prays to allow the petition.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties, perused the averments of the complaint and also
the charge sheet, it appears that the petitioner is aged
about 19 years and the victim is aged about 15 years
3 months. Both have eloped from their respective houses
and it is stated that they had been to Krishnagiri, Tamil
Nadu. Again, they came to Bengaluru and stayed in
Hongasandra. It is stated in the charge sheet that the
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
HC-KAR
petitioner married the victim and now, she has given
birth to a child. Today, the victim / respondent No.2 is
present before this Court and has stated that she is
willing to stay along with the petitioner. Considering the
said facts and circumstances and also the submission of
the respondent No.2, it is appropriate to grant him bail as
the petitioner has to take care of the victim and the child.
9. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged
on bail in Spl.C.C.No.2377/2025
pending on the file of learned Additional
City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-III,
Bengaluru, arising out of Crime
No.265/2024 registered by the
respondent-police for the offences
stated supra, on executing a personal
bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with one
NC: 2026:KHC:19905
HC-KAR
surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court.
(iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or
tamper the prosecution witnesses nor
hamper the proceedings of the Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the
Trial Court on all hearing dates without
fail.
(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any
criminal activities till disposal of the
case.
In case the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions
as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file
necessary application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
Bss
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
