TIRUPATI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.1 is before this Court under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to release him on bail for the offences punishable under Ss. 376(2)(i), 302, 201, 114 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'I.P.C.') and Ss. 4, 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'the POCSO Act').

(2.) The petitioner/accused No.1 has contended that he is no way involved in the alleged incident and he is falsely implicated. From the perusal of the statement of witnesses creates doubt as to his presence at the time of incident. There is no prima facie material to connect him to the alleged crime. Already accused No.2 to 5 have been granted bail. The petitioner/accused No.1 also stands on the same footing. The entire material placed on record are considered, there is nothing to connect the petitioner/ accused No.1 with the alleged crime. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed and therefore, his custodial presence is no longer required. He is in judicial custody since 19/4/2022. He is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed.

(3.) Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted oral objections contending that at the relevant point of time, deceased prosecutrix was aged 13 years. Petitioner/accused No.1 is no other than the uncle of Kumari Deepa, a friend of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix was in the habit of visiting her house. During such visits, petitioner/accused No.1 used to take liberties with her and two-three times, when accused No.2 misbehaved with her, both accused No.1 and 2 were warned.