(Prayer: This criminal appeal is filed under Section 14(a)(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 praying to set aside the order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the addl. district and sessions judge, FTSC-I (POCSO) at kolar in special sessions case ipc and sc/st no.14/2025 and etc.)

Oral Judgment:

1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 04.12.2025 passed in Special Session Case IPC and SC/ST No.14/2025 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC - I, (POCSO) at Kolar.

2. The brief facts leading to this appeal is that on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, the Rayalpad Police have registered the case in Crime No.69/2025 against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity, 'POCSO Act') and Sections 64(2)(m), 89 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for brevity, 'BNS') and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w)(1)(2), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

3. The investigation officer has arrested the accused and then accused has filed application under Section 483 of BNSS and the same came to be rejected by the Trial Court.

4. Being aggrieved by this order, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Trial Court has grossly erred in rejecting the application for bail. There is no material placed by the prosecution to demonstrate that the victim is a minor in age. There is no allegation in the entire charge sheet that the accused has committed an offence since the victim belongs to SC/ST. Hence, the provision of SC/ST Act is not applicable.

6. He would further submit that the victim girl and accused were in love with each other and when the relationship between them was strained, a false case has been foisted against the appellant. The investigation is completed and the charge sheet is also filed. As such, appellant is not required for custodial interrogation and is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court and on these grounds, he sought for allowing of this appeal.

7. I have examined the materials placed before this Court.

8. On the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, Rayalpad police have registered the case in Crime No.69/2025 against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 64(2)(m), 89 and 351(2) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w)(1)(2), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act and after investigation, the investigation officer has submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(m), 89, 351(2) BNS and under Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1) (w)(1)(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

9. In column No.17 of the charge sheet, it is stated as under:

                 

                 

10. On perusal of the materials placed before the Trial Court, the Trial Court has observed in para Nos.11 to 14, which is as under:

                  “11. THIS court perused the materials placed on record along with First Information lodged. The first information lodged by the victim herself would indicate that, the accused developed intimacy with the victim-minor girl under the pretext that he is loving her. The accused enticed her in the month of August 2024 and committed penetrative sexual assault with her forcibly and thereafter, did so on multiple occasions by intimidating her. She became pregnant by 5 months, thereafter, the accused administered some tablets in order to abort her, on account of which she suffered profuse bleeding. Having informed the same, the accused hurled abusive words against her knowing that she is Scheduled Caste.

                 

                  13. IT  is the  apprehension  of the prosecution that, there is likelihood that the accused may tamper with prosecution witnesses and evidence in the event he is enlarged on bail as the offences alleged are heinous in nature. The final report is filed after investigation.

                  14.     UNDER the circumstances, this Court rely upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case State of Bihar V/s Rajballav Prasad @ Rajballav Prasad Yadav (2017 2 SCC 178) in which it is held that, the presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act can also be invoked at the stage of bail. Furthermore, this court is duty bound to ensure that there must be scope for a fair trial enabling all the witnesses to depose without any fear. Undoubtedly, the final report is filed by the Investigation Officer which would indicate prima- facie materials secured during the course of investigation, which would attract the presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act. The witnesses yet to be examined. Thus, considering the fact that the offences alleged against the accused are heinous in nature, punishable with imprisonment for life or death, the likelihood that the victim or the material witnesses be tampered with cannot be ruled out. Therefore, without expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the case, this court of the considered view that the applicant has not made out any grounds, at this stage to admit him into the bail on the grounds as sought for, accordingly, the point under consideration is answered in Negative.”

11.    On re-examination/re-appreciation of the materials on record, I am of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has properly appreciated the materials on record in accordance with law and facts. I do not find any factual or legal error in the impugned order. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

                  ORDER

                  The appeal is dismissed.