PRUTHVISINGH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D.V.Pattar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Girija S.Hiremath, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

(2.) n d respondent though served remained absent. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under :- Mother of the victim girl Smt.Shamshad Begum has lodged a complaint with Koppal Police on 27/8/2022 initially for the offence punishable U/sec.363 IPC as her daughter who is minor girl has been missing. The Koppal Police registered a case in Crime No.64/2022 and investigated the matter. During the course of investigation, investigation agency traced the victim girl in the company of the present petitioner. After recording the statement of the victim girl, need arose for the investigation agency to invoke the provisions of Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act along with Sec. 376 IPC as the present petitioner had physical relationship with the victim girl. After thorough investigation, police filed charge sheet against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. The attempt made by the petitioner to obtain an order of grant of bail is turned down by the learned Special Judge by order dtd. 3/12/2022 in Special S.C. POCSO No.55/2022 and thereafter petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) Reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, Sri D.V.Pattar, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that in the case on hand, the petitioner had a love affair with the victim girl and in pursuance thereof, the victim girl had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner and they went out of house as there was an opposition by the family members of the victim girl for their love affair and when they stayed together, they had physical relationship voluntarily. In other words, the petitioner contends that it is a consensual act and therefore, no offence whatsoever as alleged against the petitioner are made out and sought for grant of bail.