SHARANGOUDA S/O RAMANGOUDA POLICEPATIL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought for regular bail under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') in Crime No.65/2019 of Kembhavi Police Station registered for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 354(A), 506, 376 and 511 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'IPC') and sections 10, 4 and 18 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'POCSO Act'), pending on the file of District and Sessions Judge, Yadgir, in Spl.Case POCSO No.79/2019.

(2.) The allegation against the present petitioner is that he attempted to commit rape on a minor girl aged about eight years in their village when she was going all alone to get some sugar and tea powder for her house. It is at that time on 29.05.2019 in the afternoon the petitioner is said to have followed her on his motor cycle and made her to sit on his motor cycle. He is said to have taken her to a nearby bush and he was attempting to commit rape on her. It is at that time, due to intervention of one Shri Ningappa S/o Hanamanthraya Chigarihal, the accused is said to have ran away from the place. The said Ningappa is said to have brought the victim back to her house. Hearing the details about the incident from his daughter, the mother of the alleged victim has lodged the complaint against the petitioner in the respondent - police station which was registered in Crime No.65/2019 for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 354(A), 506, 376, 511 of IPC and sections 10, 4, 18 of POCSO Act. The accused was said to have been arrested on 03.06.2019 and since then he is said to have been in judicial custody. The complainant police, after investigation, filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 354 (A), 506, 376, 511 of IPC and sections 10, 4 and 18 of POCSO Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is a created and concocted story at the instance of one of the relatives of the alleged victim girl who is a habitual complainant in many of the criminal cases against the family of the accused and various other villagers. He further submitted that the alleged tracing of the motor cycle for nearly a day in the same alleged spot of crime is also another suspicious circumstance because, had really the accused been there near the place of the alleged incident, he would have ran away from the place along with his motor cycle and would not have left his motor cycle. He also submits that medical evidence also does not support the case of the prosecution.