Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in High-Profile POCSO Case, Cites Lack of Evidence as Reason

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru has granted bail to the accused No.3 in a high-profile case involving serious charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, among others. The decision was rendered by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar on October 13, 2023.

The case, Criminal Appeal No. 65/2023, had accused Paramashivaiah A J, who had been in custody for over a year, seeking bail in connection with Crime No.387/2022 of Chitradurga Rural Police Station. The charges against him included Sections 376(2)(n), 376(DA), 376(3), 201, 202, 506 r/w 34 and 37 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act, Section 3(f), and Section 7 of the Religious Institution Prevention of Misuse Act, 1988, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015.

The court's decision to grant bail was grounded in its observation that the prosecution case lacked sufficient evidence and that the appellant's custody for over a year was unwarranted. The judgment stated, "Merely because the appellant – accused No.3 is an influential person, is not a ground to keep him in custody as a pre-trial punishment till conclusion of the trial, wherein the prosecution has to examine 84 witnesses and further proceedings are stayed at present."

The court also noted that the appellant, Paramashivaiah A J, claimed innocence and alleged conspiracy, questioning the delay in lodging the complaint and the alleged concealment of crucial facts.

This decision follows a series of legal battles and has garnered attention due to the serious nature of the charges and the subsequent grant of bail. The court's emphasis on the need for evidence and its assertion that custody should not be a pre-trial punishment has sparked discussions among legal experts and activists.

Date of Decision: October 13, 2023

Paramashivaiah A J  vs State of Karnataka

Similar News