MARUTI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail in Crime No.252/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 363 , 376 , 109 , 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 8, 10, 12, 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that one Nirupadeppa S/o Magundappa Guledgudda filed a complaint alleging that, he had twin daughters i.e victim girl and another by name Akshata and they were studying in 9th standard in Girls High School at Kushtagi. On 02.12.2019 at about 9 a.m. they went to the school as usual by bus. On the same day he had also been to Kushtagi for some other work and after finishing of his work at about 5 p.m. he had been to his daughter's school to pick them on his motor cycle to home. At that time his one daughter Akshata has came, and upon asking about the another daughter, she told that she had left the school at about 12 p.m. afternoon due to stomach ache and been to her friend Ganga's house and after taking rest, at about 3.30 p.m. she left from her friend's house by saying that she will go to her village. Then the complainant has phoned to his wife and asked about victims return to home. But his wife told that she had not yet came to the home. Thereafter he phoned to his relatives and asked about his daughter, but he did not get any clue about his daughter from them. After due enquiry when he did not get any information about his daughter, he suspected on petitioner-accused No.1 and Ramanna S/o Kemphanuma Bhovi-accused No.2 that they might have kidnapped his daughter. The Kushtagi Police have registered the said complaint in Crime No.252/2019 of Kushtagi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 363 , 34 of IPC. The Police arrested the petitioner-accused No.1 on 03.12.2019. The petitioner-accused No.1 filed regular bail application before the District and Sessions/Special Judge, Koppal in Crl.Misc.No.947/2019 and the same came to be rejected. Therefore, the petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking bail.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 and learned HCGP for respondent-State.