VIJAYKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Koppal Women Police Station Crime No.36/2021 registered in Special SC.POCSO No.12/2021 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 363, 376(1), 342, 376(2) (J), 376(n) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of The Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act 2012 (for short "?POCSO Act "?).

(2.) The brief facts leading to the case are that the complainant is resident of Yalamagiri village in Koppal Taluk and victim is his daughter and that they used to attend sandy day in Irakalgada village regularly and on 12.04.2021 his wife-Veeramma and victim went to Irakalgada for attending sandy day in evening by 5.00 p.m. and by 6.00 p.m., the complainant received a call from his wife asserting that the victim found missing and in spite of search, they could not trace her. Then after discussing with elders, he lodged a complaint on 14.04.2021 at 3.30 p.m. and crime was registered in Women Police Station Crime No.36/2021 for the offence punishable under section 363 of IPC. In the meanwhile, the investigating officer undertook the investigation and traced the victim in the Kukkehalli village of Shimoga District in the custody of the petitioner-accused in a farm house and they were brought to Koppal and were subjected to medical examination. Further, the statement of the victim girl was recorded and she disclosed that the accused induced her away and later on, in Kukkehalli village, in a farm house, he committed aggravated sexual assault on her and the parents of the petitioner also threatened her. The statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was recorded before the learned Magistrate and she has reiterated all these aspects. Then the investigating officer after completing investigation found that there is material evidence against the accused- petitioner has submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner-accused. The petitioner filed regular bail petition before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Koppal and the learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 05.07.2021 rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner has approached this court seeking regular bail.

(3.) Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. Perused the records.