VARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed his petition under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.50/2024 of Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 376(3) and 420 of IPC as well as under Ss. 4(2), 5(L) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act').

(2.) The brief allegations made by the complainant ie., the victim disclose that, she was practicing Volley Ball since 2016-17 and in the year 2018, the petitioner/accused recognized as a National Hockey Player, who was in the same location of SAI Bengaluru, started misusing her at instagram and at that time she was just 16 years old. However, it is alleged that, she did not bother to reciprocate, but later, the team mates of the petitioner started patronizing her by stating that they are her brothers, who are there to support her and thereafter petitioner also started pleading her to talk to him and meet him by portraying crocodile tears under the guise of sincere love. It is alleged that, in July 2019, the petitioner took her to a hotel in Jayanagar 4th Block for Dinner in a room and he tried to touch her and at that time she was 17 years old and later on he repeatedly alleged to have committed rape on her for years together in different locations at Bhuvaneshwar, Delhi and Jalandhar under the guise of uploading intimate pictures taken by him in the social media. It is the contention that due to her innocence she had no knowledge of she being trapped with an evil intent and malicious propaganda to satisfy his lust under the pretext of marriage. It is alleged that, on 14/5/2023, the petitioner took the victim to Taj Hotel in MG road, wherein it is also alleged that he has raped her showing photos and later on he started rejecting her and abusing her instead of fulfilling promise of marriage made to her and hence, a complaint came to be lodged in this regard.

(3.) On the basis of the complaint, FIR came to be registered and apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking anticipatory bail. However, his bail petition came to be rejected and hence, he is before this Court.