Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26365 (KAR)

AJAYA. K. V. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/6844/2025 · 2025-05-20

S Rachaiah

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6844 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: AJAYA. K. V., S/O VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT KENNALU VILLAGE, CHINAKURALI HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 435 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A G SRIDHAR., ADV.) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA SHO BY PEENYA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO THIS HONBLE COURT OF KARNATAKA. BENGALURU-560 001 2. SMT. LATHA B.N W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, NO.37/38, NEAR SEAN, RICE APARTMENT AMARAVATHI LAYOUT, MARUTHI NAGARA NAGASANDRA, BANGALORE CITY-560 073 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, ADV.) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN SPL.CC.NO.203/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-II, BENGALURU, REGISTERED BY 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE IN CR.NO.626/2024 OF PEENYA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 137(2),64 OF BNS, 2023, U/S 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the accused seeking for regular bail in Spl.C.C.No.203/2025 pending on the file of the Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-II, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 64 of BNS, 2023, U/S 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the daughter of the complainant left the house for college and she did not return home even after 5.00 pm. They enquired about the victim in the college, however, they could not get any information. Hence, a missing complaint came to be registered. Later on, respondent No.2 came to know that the petitioner herein kidnapped the victim and had sexual assault on her. Therefore, further statement has been recorded and a case came to be registered by the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 respondent police against the petitioner in Cr.No.626/2024 for the offences stated supra. 3. Heard Sri. A.G.Sridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP for respondent –State. 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial of the case has been commenced. P.Ws.1 to 3 have been examined. P.W.3 being a victim stated in her examination-in-chief that she has called the petitioner over phone and asked him to take her out of her house, or else, she would commit suicide. The victim was aged about 17 years as on the date of incident, therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently opposed the said submissions and she further submitted that merely because the witnesses have turned hostile, that does not mean that, the petitioner has - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 not committed any offences. The facts and circumstances of the case has to be considered in totality at the time of analyzing the evidence. When there is an evidence in respect of offence of sexual assault against a minor girl that would be sufficient to convict the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application, at this stage, cannot be considered and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the findings given by the Trial Court in rejecting the bail petition, it appears from the record that P.W.3 being a victim has turned hostile and she has not supported the case of the prosecution. When the victim herself turned hostile, keeping the petitioner in judicial custody, in my considered view, may not be required. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant bail by imposing suitable conditions. 7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.C.No.203/2025 (Cr. No.626/2024) pending on the file of Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-II, Bengaluru, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required till filing of the charge sheet. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail. iii. The petitioner shall not threaten nor tamper the prosecution witnesses. iv. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Trial Court forthwith. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18308 CRL.P No. 6844 of 2025 In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE JS/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46