[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Naveen vs State Of Karnataka on 6 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
CRL.P No. 16938 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16938 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /
483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI. NAVEEN
S/O NARASIMHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/AT CHIGATAGERE VILLAGE
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 101
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DEVENDRA N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY GOWRIBIDANUR RURAL POLICE STATION
CHIKKABALLAPUR
Digitally signed by REPRESENTED BY
LAKSHMINARAYANA STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001
2. SMT. GANGAPPA
S/O NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/AT CHIGATAGERE VILLAGE
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP FOR R1;
R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
CRL.P No. 16938 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C
(UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM
ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.SC.NO.138/2025 IN
CR.NO.192/2025 OF GOWRIBIDANUR RURAL P.S.,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT (1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN)
PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 376(2)(n),506 OF IPC, UNDER SECTION
5(n),5(l),6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section
483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Special.S.C.No.138/2025
arising out of Crime No.192/2025 of Gowribidanur Rural Police
Station pending on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Chikkaballapur registered for offences punishable under
Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and Sections 5(n), 5(l), 6 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -State.
Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent
and unrepresented.
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend
that the alleged incident has taken place in September -2023
and the complaint has been filed on 23.06.2025 and there is
delay in filing the complaint. The victim has been examined by
the doctor on 23.06.2025. The victim has not stated anything
regarding sexual intercourse by the petitioner on her in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. As the charge
sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for further custodial
interrogation. The petitioner is married man having a wife and
two minor children. The wife of the petitioner is working in
garment factory. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
for respondent No.1 -State would contend that the victim girl
was aged 17 years as on the date of alleged offence. On the
basis of the statement of the victim girl, a case has been
registered against the petitioner. In the said statement, the
victim girl has specifically stated the acts of this petitioner
having sexual intercourse on her in stadium gym room several
times. The petitioner is Uncle in relation to the victim girl. The
doctor who has examined the victim girl has noted that her
hymen is not intact and opined that there might be chances of
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
HC-KAR
intercourse. The statement of C.W.26 -Narsimhmurthi indicate
the acts of this petitioner even approaching the victim girl,
even after they shifted to some other village. The charge sheet
materials show prima facie case against the petitioner for
offences alleged against him. With this, she prayed to reject the
petition.
5. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has
perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on record.
6. As per charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is
that the petitioner is related to the victim girl and in the year
2023 when victim girl was studying in Municipal College in PUC,
at that time the petitioner used to take her in his auto rickshaw
to the college. That on 12.09.2023 at about 07.00a.m., the
petitioner took the victim girl in his auto rickshaw near Netaji
Stadium and at about 08.00 a.m. in the gym room, the
petitioner stating that he is loving her had sexual intercourse
and thereafter, had sexual intercourse in the same place
several times. Date of birth of the victim girl is 16.12.2007. The
statement of the victim girl indicates that the petitioner is
cousin brother of her father. It further indicated that on
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
HC-KAR
12.09.2023 the petitioner took the victim girl in his auto
rickshaw to stadium and in the gym room he gave her eatables
and at about 08.00 a.m. he gave her life threat in the gym
room and had forcible sexual intercourse on her. Thereafter,
also he had sexual intercourse on her in the same place several
times. The said aspect came to the knowledge of the parents of
the Victim girl and villagers. People of the village started talking
in that regard and therefore, the petitioner's mother and elder
sister came to the house of the victim girl and quarreled with
them and therefore, the victim girl and her family members
shifted to Mittenahalli Village and residing in rented residence.
The petitioner also came to Mittenahalli Village and tried to
contact her and victim girl intimated the same to her parents.
Thereafter, they shifted from Mittenahalli Village to Udumalodu
Grama and started residing in a house. The petitioner coming
to know the same on 05.06.2025 came there and gave phone
to the victim girl and she intimated the said aspect to her
mother. The mother of the victim took her to Chikkaballapur
District Women Unit and there the victim girl was sent to
children's home. The victim girl's statement has been recorded
and it has been registered in Crime No.198/2025. The
NC: 2026:KHC:6984
HC-KAR
statement of the victim girl has also been recorded under
Section 183 of BNSS. The petitioner is stated to be married
man having wife and two children. In spite of he being married
man, he was following the victim girl and had sexual
intercourse with her. The doctor who examined the victim girl
had noted that hymen of the victim girl is not intact and
opened that there might be chances of intercourse. Considering
the above aspects, the charge sheet materials indicate that
there is prima facie case against the petitioner for offences
alleged against him. In order to substantiate that there was
quarrel between the petitioner and the respondent No.2 -father
of the victim girl, no materials are placed on record.
7. Considering the above, the petitioner has not made
out any case for grant of bail. In the result, the petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DSP
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5
