| |
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 637
|
| Court : High Court of Karnataka (Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi) |
| Case No : Criminal Petition No. 200675 Of 2026 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)-) |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY |
| Parties : Hanumantraya Versus The State Of Karnataka Through, Raichur Women Police Station, Rep. by Addl. SPP, Kalaburagi & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Shivanand V. Pattanshetti, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, Veeranagouda Malipatil, HCGP. |
| Date of Judgment : 21-05-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
POCSO Act - Section 17 -
Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC-K 3888,
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules / Orders Mentioned:
- Section 439 of Cr.P.C (Old)
- Section 483 of BNSS (New)
- IPC 366(A)
- IPC 376
- Sec 6 of POCSO Act
- Sec 17 of POCSO Act
2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Anticipatory bail
- Non‑bailable warrant (NBW)
- Parity
- No objection
- Trial Court
3. Summary:
The petition under Section 483 of the BNSS 2023 seeks regular bail for accused No. 2 in a case involving offences under IPC 366(A), IPC 376 and Sections 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act. The High Court noted that the charge sheet does not allege the accused’s involvement in the offences under IPC 376 and POCSO Sec 6, and that anticipatory bail had already been granted. The complainant (victim’s mother) raised no objection to bail. The trial court had dismissed the bail application despite the accused’s appearance and lack of objections. Considering the main accused is already on bail and the absence of specific allegations against the petitioner, the court found no ground to refuse bail and ordered its grant.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C (Old) u/S 483 of BNSS (New), praying to grant the regular Bail to the petitioner/Accused No.2 in Spl.C (P) No. 41/2025 (Raichur Women Ps Crime No.3/2024 District Raichur) pending on the file of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge Raichur, District Raichur, for the offence punishable IPC 366(A), 376 U/Sec 6 of POCSO Act, U/Sec 17 Of POCSO Act, in the interest of justice and equity)
Oral Order
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.
2. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 is also present.
3. Notice issued to respondent No.2 is returned duly served. The respondent No.2 is called out, absent. Hence, service of notice to respondent No.2 is held sufficient.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader seeks time to file objections.
5. However, in spite of several opportunities, the respondent No.1 has not filed any objections. Now the learned High Court Government Pleader orally submits that the petitioner has not made out any ground to grant bail and he seeks for dismissal of the petition.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned HCGP for the respondent No.1 on the petition. Perused the relevant materials available on record.
7. The present petition is filed by the petitioner/ accused No.2 under section 483 of BNSS 2023 for grant of bail in the case in Crime No.3/2024 of the respondent Police registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376 of IPC and Sections 6 and 17 of POCSO Act.
8. Even though the case registered under POCSO Act, the allegation against the petitioner as per the complaint and also as per the charge sheet is that the petitioner took the victim by Motorcycle to her house after the alleged incident. Hence, there is absolutely no case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 6 of POCSO Act.
9. Moreover, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also as forthcoming on record, it would be clear that earlier the petitioner was granted anticipatory by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raichur, as per the order dated 07.02.2024 in Criminal Misc.No.25/2024.
10. After filing of the charge sheet, summons was issued to the petitioner/ accused No.2. As per the order sheet of the case produced by the petitioner, there is no mention that the summons issued to the petitioner was served in the case. However, the trial Court issued NBW and in view of NBW issued against the petitioner, the petitioner was arrested and produced before the trial Court. Subsequently, the petitioner sought bail by filing the application before the trial Court.
11. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the order dated 30.04.2026 of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raichur, in the said petition in Crl. Misc.No.154/2026, there is clear mention that "In response to the notice issued against respondent No.2, she having appeared before the Court filed memo of no objections to grant bail". This would clearly show that even the complainant, who is mother of the victim, has no objection to grant bail in favour of the petitioner. But the trial Court has dismissed the bail application of the petitioner.
12. Further, when the main accused i.e., the accused No.1 is already on bail, the petitioner being accused No.2 is entitled to on the ground of parity, that too when there is no allegation against the petitioner regarding the offence punishable under Sections 6 of POCSO Act and Section 376 of IPC. Moreover, the petitioner already had the benefit of bail in view of the anticipatory bail granted in his favour. Hence, there is no reason to reject the bail to the petitioner. There is no any special ground made out by the respondent police to reject this bail petition. Accordingly, the present petition deserves to be allowed.
13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is hereby allowed.
Consequently, the petitioner/ accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail on his executing personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that:
i) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all the hearing dates without fail till completion of trial.
ii) He shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses and also shall not hamper further investigation of the case, if any.
iii) He shall not commit any similar offence or any offence during the pendency of case.
|
| |
