- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102442 OF 2025 (439 OF Cr.PC/483 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: NAGARAJ NINGAPPA KARI, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: LABROUR, R/O. TELAGINAHATTI VILLAGE, TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-591122. …PETITIONER (BY SHRI S. B. MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, REPRESENTED BY ANKALAGI P.S-591101. 2. CHILD WELFARE OFFICER, SHRUSTI HENNU MAKKALA TANGUDANA, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016. 3. BHARMAPPA TOLI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHELP, R/O. TELAGINAHATTI VILLAGE, TQ.GOKAK, DIST.BELAGAVI-591122. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SHRI SHIVA SHIRUR, ADV. FOR R3) Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S.483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL TO THE ACCUSED WITH RESPECT TO THE ANKALAGI P.S. CRIME NO.10/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 363, 376(2)(n), 506 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTIONS 4, 6 OF POCSO ACT, ON THE FILE OF LEARNED ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1 (POCSO COURT) BELAGAVI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri.S.B.Malligwad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Kirtilata Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri.Shiva Shirur, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.) seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with the Crime No.10/2025 of Ankalagi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal code (for short, ‘the IPC’) and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’) on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I (POCSO Court) Belagavi. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: 4. The de facto complainant lodged a complaint alleging that in the month March 2024 at about 4.00 p.m., accused took the victim knowingly that she was minor to a hill near Talaginhatti, where he have had aggravated and penetrative sexual assault on the victim for 4-5 times. This led to registration of FIR and investigation. 5. During the course of the investigation, the petitioner was arrested and in turn, he was remanded to the judicial custody. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any alleged offences. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The victim has not stated anything against the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 petitioner before the learned Magistrate, while recording her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., and as per the medical report, the victim herself refused to undergo medical examination. Hence, in the absence of any material against the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for bail. 7. The learned HCGP for respondent No.1–State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that there is a prima facie case against the petitioner. The victim is a minor aged about 17 years and 4 months. If the petitioner is released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses, influence the victim, and there is a likelihood of his absconding from justice. Hence, they prayed for rejection of the petition. 8. The records reveal that the victim was a minor at the time of commission of the offences. As per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it appears that the victim had consensual sexual intercourse with the accused and that the accused did not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 pressurize her. A perusal of the medical records reveals that the victim refused to undergo medical examination. This indicates that, in the absence of any material evidence, particularly with regard to the offences as alleged by the prosecution, the petitioner is entitled for bail. 9. Considering the nature of allegations, circumstances in which the offences are committed, position and status of the petitioner with reference to the victim and witnesses; since nothing has been stated by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it is fit case to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The criminal petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner – accused shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court/Trial Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9044 CRL.P No. 102442 of 2025 iii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner. iv) The petitioner shall attend the Court regularly. v) The petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offences. Violation of any of the above conditions, will entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. Ordered accordingly. Note:-The above observations are made only for the purpose of disposal of this case. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE AC /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1