- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15037 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI MUNIRAJU, S/O.LATE.ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/A. SUGATUR VILLAGE, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.ABHILASH KUMAR M.N, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.NANJUNDA GOWDA M R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY KOLAR WOMEN POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKER VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SMT. MANJULA, C/O.DEVARAJA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/A. URIGILI VILLAGE, SUGATUR POST, KOLAR - 563 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.CHANAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1; Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN SPECIAL CASE (POCSO) NO.181/2024 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.83/2024 OF KOLAR WOMEN POLICE STATION WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-I (POCSO) AT KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 363, 376(2)(n), 376(3) OF THE IPC AND SECTION 4(2), 5(1) AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Accused in Special Case (POCSO) No.181/2024 pending before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC 1, Kolar, arising out of Crime No.83/2024 registered by Kolar Women Police Station, Kolar, for offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n), 376(3) of IPC and Sections 4(2), 5(l) and 6 of the Protection of Children from sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act'), is before this Court in this successive bail petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 read with Section 439 of Cr.PC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.83/2024 was registered by Kolar Women Police Station, Kolar against the petitioner herein for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3), 363 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, based on the first information dated 24.08.2024 received from respondent No.2 herein, who is the mother of the victim girl. 4. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner herein was arrested on 24.08.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet was filed against him for the aforesaid offences. His bail application filed before the Trial Court was rejected and therefore, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.528/2025, which was dismissed as not pressed on 04.03.2025 with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after examination of the victim girl-CW.2 is completed before the Trial Court. Subsequently, the petitioner had filed a fresh bail - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 application for the Trial Court in Special Case (POCSO)No.181/2024, which was rejected on 09.10.2025. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court in this successive bail petition. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in this petition submits that before the Trial Court, the victim girl (CW.2) and all other material charge sheet witnesses have been already examined. Petitioner, who is a married man having no other criminal antecedent is in custody for last one and half year. The material on record would go to show that on 23.08.2024, after the victim girl had injured herself with a blade, she was taken to a hospital and treated. Complaint was filed by the mother of the victim girl on the next day making allegations against the petitioner. Medical records of the victim girl do not support the case of the prosecution. According, he prays to allow the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 6. Per contra, learned HCGP and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 who has filed statement of objection opposing the bail petition submit that victim was aged below 16 years as on the date of registration of the FIR. Her consent is of no consequence and she has clearly supported the case of the prosecution. They submit that even the other charge sheet witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and the doctor who had medically examined victim girl has stated that the chances of petitioner committing sexual intercourse on the victim cannot be ruled out. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 also submits that the family members of the petitioner have been consistently insisting the victim and her family members to settle the dispute. He has also placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in the case of Pradum Singh Vs. State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and others - 2024 SCC OnLine All 2127 : (2024) 129 ACC 53 and submits that period of incarceration alone cannot be a ground for grant bail in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 a case registered for offence punishable under the POCSO Act. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition. 7. FIR in the present case was registered based on the first information received from respondent No.2 on 24.08.2024. In the first information, it is averred that on 23.08.2024 victim girl had consumed some pills with a intension to commit suicide and had gone near the house of the petitioner and had cut her left hand with a blade and when she was questioned, she had informed that petitioner who had come to her house for carrying on the work of mason had developed intimacy with her and had sexual intercourse with her multiple times. Subsequently, she came to know that petitioner was married and he had cheated her and it is in this background, she had attempted to commit suicide. The police after investigation of the case had filed charge sheet against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 8. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that petitioner who was working as a mason in the house of the victim girl had proposed to her and initially the victim girl had refused his proposal. Petitioner allegedly had thereafter informed that he will marry the victim girl after about two years and therefore, the victim girl had agreed to love the petitioner. It is alleged that petitioner, after having made false promise of marrying the victim girl, had sexual intercourse with her multiple times in her house. Subsequently, the victim girl came to know on 23.08.2024 that petitioner was married and he also had a child. 9. The material on record would go to show that as on the date of registration of the FIR, the victim girl had completed 15 years of age. According to the prosecution, the alleged act of sexual assault was performed by the petitioner for the period between 16.04.2024 to 30.06.2024. As on the said date, the victim girl had not even completed 15 years of age. Victim girl has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 under Section 164 of Cr.PC and she also has deposed against him before the Court as PW.1. The doctor who had treated the injuries of the victim girl on 23.08.2024 is examined as PW.8 and he has stated that on the said day itself the victim girl had revealed the history about the injury suffered by her. According to the prosecution, the alleged act of sexual intercourse was between 16.04.2024 to 30.06.2024. First information is submitted in the present case on 24.08.2024 and therefore, merely for the reason that the medical records of the victim girl do not reflect of any sexual assault committed on the victim girl, immediately prior to she being medically examined, it cannot be held that there was no sexual assault on her, more so when the victim girl has made specific allegations against the petitioner about the sexual assault committed on her. PW.8-doctor who had medically examined her has stated before the Court that the chances of petitioner committing sexual assault on the victim cannot be ruled out. Section 29 of the POCSO Act provides for a - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 presumption as against the petitioner and the burden to rebut the said presumption is on him. 10. The material record would go to show that except the official witnesses all the other material charge sheet witnesses have been examined before the Trial Court. The prosecution in the present case has cited 30 charge sheet witnesses. It is brought to the notice of this Court that witness summons has now been issued by the Trial Court to CWs.28 and 29. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that if this criminal petition is disposed of with a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and dispose of the main case within a time frame, the same would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. The Criminal petition is dismissed with a request to the Trial Court to expedite trial and dispose of the main case as expeditiously as - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10303 CRL.P No. 15037 of 2025 possible, but not later than a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, without being influenced by the observations made by this Court in this order. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4