- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100171 OF 2025 BETWEEN: GOVIND S/O. MASTI NAIK, AGED: 49 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: PANCHAYAT BADALA, SOPPINEHOSALLI, BADAL, KUMTA, KARWAR – 581 348. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R. H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (KUMTA POLICE STATION) R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD – 580 011. 2. SMT. NAGAVENI W/O. MANJUNATH ADIGUNDI, AGED: 38 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: SOPPINEHOSALLI, BADAL, KUMTA, NOW IN KELGINA PALYA, NEAR POLICE STATION, HONNAVAR - 581 348. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF SC/ST ACT SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF REJECTION OF BAIL IN SPL.CASE NO. 82/2024 DATED 19.08.2024 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-FTSC-1 U/K/KARWAR (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF CASES FILED UNDER POCSO ACT) AND CONSEQUENTLY BAIL BE GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IN KUMTA P.S. CRIME NO. 98/2024, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376, Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 376(1), 376(2)(n), 376(AB), 376 (2)(m) AND 506 OF IPC, SECTIONS 4, 6, 10, 8 AND 12 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND SECTIONS 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v), OF SC/ST AMENDMENT ACT, 2015, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This appeal is filed by the sole accused praying to set aside the order dated 19.08.2024 passed in Special Case No.82/2024 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, U.K., Karwar, whereunder the bail application of the appellant/accused sought in respect of Kumta Police Station Crime No.98/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(1), 276(2)(n), 376(AB), 376(2)(m) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, came to be rejected. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that, the victim girl, daughter of the complainant, was aged 11 years and the appellant/accused has closely acquainted with her, had taken a land for cultivation near the house of the victim, used to come to the house of the victim when she was alone and he knew that she belongs to scheduled caste. During October 2023, when there were nobody in the house, he had sexual intercourse on her and on 02.05.2024 at about 5:30pm, he had committed sexual intercourse on the victim girl and committed the offences noted supra. The appellant/accused has been arrested on 15.04.2024 and he is in judicial custody. The appellant filed bail application and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that there is delay in filing the complaint. There - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 are several acts stated by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The Doctor who examined her at Canara Health Centre, has issued a certificate wherein the name of the person who committed sexual assault has not been stated and it is stated that it is committed by unknown person. The victim has disclosed the incident after 10 months of the incident. The evidence of the victim is not yet recorded and trial is not commenced. As charge-sheet is filed, the appellant is not required for custodial interrogation. Without considering all these aspects, the learned Trial Judge has passed the impugned order, which requires interference by this Court. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellant. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State would contend that the date of birth of the victim girl is 16.10.2013 and she is 11 years old as on the date of the alleged offence. The victim belongs to scheduled caste. The statement of the victim - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated the act of sexual intercourse by the appellant on her. If the appellant is granted bail, there is threat to the victim and other prosecution witnesses. With these, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that, there was divorce between the mother and father of the victim girl and as such she was residing with her father. The victim girl disclosed the incident to the mother when her mother took her to her house. The statement of the victim girl has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated the acts of the appellant/accused committing sexual intercourse on her. The Doctor who examined the victim girl has noted that there was bleeding from the vagina since 08.05.2024 and opined that there was evidence of sexual violence including sexual intercourse. Considering all these aspects, the learned trial Judge has rightly rejected the bail application by the impugned judgment. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 7. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the impugned order and charge-sheet material. 8. The date of birth of the victim girl as per her birth certificate is 16.10.2013. The victim girl was aged 11 years as on the date of the alleged offence. The accused is a married man cultivating the land situated near the house of the victim. The mother of the victim was residing separately from the father of the victim girl and the victim girl disclosed the incident to her mother when she took her to her house. The statement of the victim girl has been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein the victim girl has stated the acts of sexual intercourse by the appellant/accused. The Doctor who examined the victim girl has noted rupture of hymen and presence of bleeding from the vagina and found that there is evidence of sexual violence including sexual intercourse. The offence alleged against the appellant is punishable with imprisonment for 20 years and it is a heinous offence - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6821 CRL.A No. 100171 of 2025 against a child. Considering all these aspects, if the appellant/accused is granted bail, there is threat to the complainant, victim girl and other prosecution witnesses. More so, the appellant/accused is a married man committed sexual intercourse on the girl aged 11 years. 9. Considering all these aspects, the learned trial Judge has passed the impugned order. There are no grounds made out for setting aside the impugned order and grant bail to the appellant. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE Kmv CT-ASC