DHIKSHITH B.A. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioner's counsel and the High Court Government Pleader.

(2.) The petitioner has applied for bail under section 439 Cr.P.C as he has been implicated by the respondent police in Crime No. 24/2020 on the allegations that he has committed offences punishable under sections 342, 376 read with section 34 of IPC and section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act, The Government Pleader submits that the complainant, i.e., respondent No.2 has been notified.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that investigation has been completed and if the charge sheet materials are perused, it is possible to arrive at a conclusion that there are no prima facie materials as against the petitioner. The age of the complainant is 20 years. She might have given her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. but, when it is compared with the statements of other witnesses, especially with the statement of a material witness Sunil Kumar, it is possible to say that the entire incident can be doubted. The medical examination report does not indicate the presence of seminal stains in the clothes of the complainant. The petitioner is a permanent resident of his village and he will regularly appear before the court till the conclusion of the trial and therefore bail may be granted by imposing any condition.