PRAMOD.R Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the third application filed by the accused under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. and the other two applications came to be rejected. At the time of disposal, this Court in detail considered the charge sheet materials to come to a conclusion that there is a prima-facie case against the accused.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in custody since from 17.09.2019 and the presence of the appellant is not required for further investigation. He further submitted that the Police have already filed the charge sheet. He further submitted that respondent No.2 is not cooperating for early disposal of the case. He has produced the copy of order sheet. The trial Court issued summons to CW.1 and CW.2 on 16.07.2021. The said summons were served on respondent No.2 and her mother and the matter was adjourned to 26.07.2021. On 26.07.2021, respondent No.2 and her mother were called out and remained absent. The trial Court has issued a bailable warrant to CW.1 and CW.2. Insptie of bailable warrant issued to respondent No.2, respondent No.2 remained absent. The trial Court has issued non-bailable warrant on 11.08.2021. He further submits that the evidence of respondent No.2 has not been recorded yet. He refers to Sec. 35 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act'). He further submits that brother of the appellant has lodged a complaint against respondent No.2 and produced a copy of the FIR alleging that she was calling on his mobile and sent a message on WhatsApp to have sexual relations with her. He further submits that the appellant is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and prays to allow the application.

(3.) Learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the bail application submits that due to COVID- 19 pandamic, respondent No.2 could not appear before the trial Court. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to reject the application.