- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100142 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHIVANAND S/O. BASAPPA DYAVANUR, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. UGGINKERI VILLAGE, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-580001, NOW AT CENTRAL PRISON, DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GANESH RAIBAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KALAGATAGI POLICE STATION, R/BY. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD. 2. SMT.SAVITA W/O. MAHADEVAPPA BEERANAVAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC.COOLIE, R/O. UGGIKERI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS 2023, SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN KALAGHATAGI P.S. CRIME NO.281/2024, ON THE FILE OF SPECIAL COURT AND 2ND ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 64 OF BNSS AND UNDER SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT. V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.05 15:28:53 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.Ganesh Raibagi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri.Neelendra D. Gunde, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Petition is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) with following prayer: For the reasons stated above this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in Kalaghatai PS crime No.281/2024 on the file of the Special Court and 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 64 of the BNSS and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act in the ends of justice.” 3. Facts in brief which are at most necessary for disposal of the bail petition are as under: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 The mother of the victim girl lodged a complaint with Kalaghatagi Police Station on 28.11.2024 which was registered in crime No.281/2024 for the offence punishable under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short, ‘the BNS) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’). 4. The gist of the complaint averments reveals that the accused being a resident of Ugginkeri village, Kalaghatagi taluk, is said to have had forcible sexual intercourse on 24.11.2024, taking advantage of the loneliness of the victim girl in her house. Police, after receipt of the complaint, rescued the victim girl and registered the case in Crime No.281/2024. The victim girl was taken to the hospital for medical examination. Thereafter, a detailed investigation was conducted, and a charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner herein for the aforesaid offences. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 5. Learned special judge has taken cognizance and the matter is now pending. Learned special judge by order dated 24.12.2024 rejected the prayer for grant of bail. 6. Bing aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court. 7. Sri.Ganesh Raibagi, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition, vehemently contended that the material collected by the investigation agency in the form of a charge sheet is hardly sufficient to conclude the offences alleged against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner should be enlarged on bail, taking note of the fact that the charge sheet is now filed and the continuation of the petitioner/accused in judicial custody is no longer warranted. 8. Per contra, Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri.Neelendra D. Gunde, learned counsel for respondent No.2 have opposed the bail grounds by contending that the victim girl is aged about 15 years, and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 material collected by the investigation agency including the final opinion of the doctor, it is crystal clear that there were materials that would prima facie indicate that there was a forcible sexual intercourse. 9. The victim being aged 15 years and the allegations are to the effect that when there was no body in the house, the accused being aged 35 years, took the advantage of the loneliness of the victim girl in her house and he has committed the aforesaid offences. Therefore, the question of granting the bail would not arise in a matter of this nature, and sought for dismissal of the bail petition. 10. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 11. On such perusal of the material on record, the statement of the victim girl has been recorded by the investigation officer, and her statement has been recorded before the jurisdiction Magistrate under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 12. The materials collected by the investigation agency including the medical records, would not rule out any possibility of sexual assault on the victim girl. 13. Whether at all factual ingredients which are required to attract the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, are made out in the case on hand are not cannot, be decided by this court at this stage by conducting a mini trial. 14. In fact, the catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and this Court have cautioned the Court entertaining the bail petition from holding a mini trial, as the same may prejudice the case of the parties during the trial one way or the other. 15. Thus, resisting from holding the mini trial when materials on record is appreciated for the limited purpose of finding out whether the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him, this Court is of the considered opinion that the statement of the victim girl coupled with the medical evidence already collected by the investigating agency would definitely disentitle the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4154 CRL.P No. 100142 of 2025 petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail by this Court by resorting to the special powers vested in this Court under Section 483 of the BNSS. 16. Thus, this Court is of the definite opinion that materials available on record atleast at this stage, are hardly sufficient to entertain the bail request of the petitioner. 17. After the victim girl is examined, if there is a positive changed circumstance, the petitioner can always approach this court with a successive bail request. Reserving such liberty for the petitioner, the following order is passed. ORDER The bail petition is meritless and hereby rejected. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 13