[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Aflan Khan @ Afnan Shariff vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 January, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
CRL.P No. 17321 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 17321 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) /
482(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. AFLAN KHAN @ AFNAN SHARIFF
S/O SHABBIR KHAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT 8TH CROSS,
RIGHT SIDE OF HASSAN ROAD
ARSIKERE TOWN
HASSAN - 01
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRATHEEP K C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
REP BY ARSIKERE TOWN POLICE STATION
LAKSHMINARAYANA HASSAN DISTRICT
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
COURT OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. NAZEEMA
W/O DASTHAGIR
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT 1ST CROSS, HASSAN ROAD LEFT SIDE
ARSIKERE TOWN
HASSAN - 01,.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
CRL.P No. 17321 of 2025
HC-KAR
PERMANENT ADDRESS:
GARUDANAGIRI ROAD
ARSIKERE TOWN
HASSAN - 01
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP FOR R1
SRI SYED ARIF PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 (FILED UNDER
SECTION 482 BNSS) Cr.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
PETITIONo.392/2025 (CRIME No.105/2025), PENDING ON THE
FILE OF THE HON'BLE ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND FTSC I AT HASSAN FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 65(1) OF BNS SEC.4,6 OF POCSO ACT 2012
BY ARSIKERE TOWN POLICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS 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
Spl.C.No.392/2025 (Crime No.105/2025 of Arasikere Town
Police Station) registered for the offence under Section
65(1) of BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act,
2012, pending on the file of Additional District and
Sessions Judge and FTSC-1, Hassan.
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
HC-KAR
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Addl.SPP for respondent/State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend
that the incident has taken place on 17.07.2025 and the
complaint has been filed on 22.07.2025. The Doctor who
has examined the victim girl has noted in column No.26
that Vulva, Vagina, Hymen, Fourchette, Perineum, Cervix
as 'unremarkable.' He contends that the term
'unremarkable' in a medical report means that scan, test,
or physical exam showed no abnormalities, disease, or
concerning finding. He submits that it indicates that the
area examined appears healthy, normal, or within
expected limits. He further contends that the FSL report is
negative. The statement of the victim girl has already
been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. Considering
the said aspect at the most, the offence which could be
attracted is Section 8 of the POCSO Act and it is provided
with punishment of imprisonment which may extend to
five years. With this he prayed to allow the petition.
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
HC-KAR
4. Per contra, learned Addl.SPP for respondent/State
would contend that victim is aged 15 years. The petitioner
who is the relative of CW.4 stayed back in the house.
When CW.4 went to other place, in the night he called the
victim girl and had forcible sexual intercourse on her, even
though she has resisted for the same. The statement of
the victim girl has been recorded under Section 183 of
BNSS wherein she has specifically stated the acts of the
petitioner committing sexual intercourse even though she
has screamed. The offence alleged against the petitioner is
a heinous offence and the punishment of imprisonment
which may extend up to 20 years. The charge sheet
material show prima-face case against the petitioner for
the offence alleged against the petitioner. With this he
prayed to reject the petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on
record.
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
HC-KAR
6. The case of the prosecution as per the charge
sheet is that the victim girl came to the house of CW.4
who is her relative. On 17.07.2025, CW.4 went to
Bengaluru leaving the victim girl in her house and at that
time, the petitioner was also in the house of CW.4 and he
did not go out of the house. On 18.07.2025 at 12.00
midnight, petitioner called her out of the room in order to
talk with her and when she came to Hall, he told that he is
loving her and will marry her and had forcible sexual
intercourse against her will. The statement of the victim
girl has been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS wherein
she has specifically stated the acts of the petitioner having
forcible sexual intercourse on her. Merely because the
Doctor has stated that Vulva, Vagina, Hymen, Fourchette,
Perineum, Cervix as 'unremarkable', at this stage it cannot
be said that the alleged act has not taken place. The
victim girl is aged 15 years as on the date of incident.
There is presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act.
NC: 2026:KHC:4764
HC-KAR
Considering the above aspects, there is a prima-facie case
against the petitioner for the offence alleged against him.
7. Considering the above aspect, the petitioner has
not made out case for grant of bail. In the result, the
petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DKB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
