- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8446 CRL.P No. 102327 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102327 OF 2025 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI MAHANTESH S/O. SIDDAPPA PUJERI, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: LAW STUDENT & AGRICULTURE, R/O. JODAKURULI, TQ CHIKKODI, DIST BELAGAVI–591213. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.M. MUCHHANDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THE POLICE INSPECTOR, CHIKKODI POLICE STATION, TALUK CHIKKODI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI, PIN-591201, R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT: DHARWAD BENCH, PIN-580011. 2. SHRI MALAKARI S/O. KENCHAPPA NASLAPURE, (FATHER OF VICTIM), AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: SHEPHARD, R/O. JODAKURULI, TQ. CHIKKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591213. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. S.B. DEYANNAVAR, ADV. FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO THAT THE PETITION BE ALLOWED AND THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 MAY BE ENLARGED ON REGULAR BAIL IN (CHIKKODI PS. CRIME 89/2024) SPL.CASE NO.442/2024 UNDER SECTIONS 363, 323, 376(2)(I), 109, 506 R/W. 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4, 6, 12, 17 AND 18 OF POCSO ACT, PENDING TRIAL ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-I BELAGAVI, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8446 CRL.P No. 102327 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. S.M. Muchandi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Abhishek Malipatil, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State and Sri. S.B. Deyannavar, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner – accused No.3 has filed this petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.89/2024 (Spl. Case No.442/2024) on the file of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge FTSC-1, Belagavi, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 323, 376(2)(i), 109, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 4, 6, 12, 17 and 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), registered by the Chikkodi Police Station. 3. The case of the prosecution is that complainant’s daughter, a minor was allegedly sexually assaulted by - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8446 CRL.P No. 102327 of 2025 accused No.1 while being accompanied by accused Nos.2 and 3, who supported accused No.1. The accused were charged for the offences punishable stated supra. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner – accused No.3 has been falsely implicated in the present case. The entire allegation is against accused No.1 and accused No.3 had supported accused No.1. Except this allegation, there are no other allegations against him. Accused No.2 is already released on bail. Thus, on the ground of parity, the petitioner who is standing on the same footing entitled for bail. Hence, he prayed for allowing of the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP opposes the bail petition contending that the petitioner is involved in offences punishable under the provisions of POCSO Act which carries serious implications. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that victim, though a minor, has voluntarily stated her willingness - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8446 CRL.P No. 102327 of 2025 to continue the relationship with petitioner No.1, her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. supports the version that there was no force or coercion. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstance of the case, particularly the victim as being on the verge of majority, the absence of any physical injuries as per medical records, the consensual nature of the relationship as per the victim’s own statement, and the fact that, accused Nos.1 and 2 are already on bail, the allegation against accused No.2 and accused No.3 are similar and on same footing, thus, this Court is of the view that petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Criminal petition is hereby allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail in Crime No.89/2024 (Spl. Case No.442/2024) subject to the following conditions: [i] The petitioner – accused No.3 shall furnish a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8446 CRL.P No. 102327 of 2025 surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. [ii] The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witness or tamper the investigation in any manner. [iii] The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates without fail and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission. Any violation of the above conditions will entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE Rsh /ct-an List no.: 1 sl no.: 43